Matthew LaBorde v. Commonwealth of Virginia

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00493-TSE-IDD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998729168]. Mailed to: Matthew LaBorde. [11-6884]

Appeal: 11-6884

Document: 15

Date Filed: 11/23/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6884

MATTHEW M. LABORDE,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; GENE M. JOHNSON, Director,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:10-cv-00493-TSE-IDD)

Submitted:

November 17, 2011

Decided:

November 23, 2011

Before KING, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Matthew M. LaBorde, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey,
III,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Richmond,
Virginia,
for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6884

Document: 15

Date Filed: 11/23/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Matthew
court’s

order

petition.

M.

LaBorde

denying

relief

seeks
on

to

appeal

the

28

U.S.C.

§ 2254

his

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

district

absent

“a

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

See 28 U.S.C.

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

of

a

When the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
this

standard

by

demonstrating

that

reasonable

jurists

would

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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.
529 U.S. at 484-85.

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that LaBorde has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss
the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

2

Appeal: 11-6884

before

Document: 15

the

court

Date Filed: 11/23/2011

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3