Corey Johnson v. Loretta Kelly

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998379841-2] Originating case number: 3:07-cv-00731-RLW Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998420121] [10-6742]

Corey Johnson v. Loretta Kelly

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6742 Document: 14

Date Filed: 09/08/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6742 COREY E. JOHNSON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. LORETTA K. KELLY, Warden, Sussex I State Prison, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (3:07-cv-00731-RLW) Submitted: August 30, 2010 SHEDD, Circuit Decided: Judges, and September 8, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior

Before KING and Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey E. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Leah A. Darron, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6742 Document: 14

Date Filed: 09/08/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Corey E. Johnson seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for

reconsideration of the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 a (2006) circuit petition. justice or The order is not a

appealable

unless

judge

issues

certificate of appealability. Reid v. Angelone, of 369 F.3d

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); 363, will 369 not (4th issue Cir. 2004). "a

A certificate

appealability

absent

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). relief on the merits, that a When the district court denies satisfies would this standard that claims 473, by the is 484

prisoner

demonstrating district debatable

reasonable of v.

jurists the

find

court's or

assessment Slack

constitutional 529 U.S.

wrong.

McDaniel,

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. at 484-85. that We have independently has not made reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. the record and

conclude

Johnson

requisite

showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 2 and dismiss the appeal. We

Case: 10-6742 Document: 14

Date Filed: 09/08/2010

Page: 3

dispense

with

oral

argument

because

the

facts

and

legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3