Bobby Roddy v. Evelyn Seifert

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [998585282-2] Originating case number: 2:10-cv-00888 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998645470]. Mailed to: Roddy. [11-6437]

Download PDF
Appeal: 11-6437 Document: 9 Date Filed: 08/02/2011 Page: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6437 BOBBY EUGENE RODDY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. EVELYN SEIFERT, Warden, Northern Correctional Facility, Respondent - Appellee, and DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (2:10-cv-00888) Submitted: July 28, 2011 Decided: August 2, 2011 Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby Eugene Roddy, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 11-6437 Document: 9 Date Filed: 08/02/2011 Page: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Bobby Eugene Roddy, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition. unless a circuit appealability. justice or The order is not appealable judge issues a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). certificate of A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” (2006). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this jurists would reasonable standard find by that demonstrating the district that court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). denies relief demonstrate both on procedural that the When the district court grounds, dispositive the prisoner procedural ruling must is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. We have independently reviewed the Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. record Roddy has not made the requisite showing. and conclude that Accordingly, we deny Roddy’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 Appeal: 11-6437 Document: 9 Date Filed: 08/02/2011 Page: 3 of 3 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?