Keith Wilson v. Don Wood

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:06-cv-00408-WO-WWD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998787996]. Mailed to: Wilson. [11-7265]

Appeal: 11-7265

Document: 8

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7265

KEITH D. WILSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SUPERINTENDENT DON WOOD; SECRETARY OF CORRECTIONS THEODIS
BECK,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
William L. Osteen,
Jr., District Judge. (1:06-cv-00408-WO-WWD)

Submitted:

February 9, 2012

Decided:

February 14, 2012

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith D. Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Raleigh,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7265

Document: 8

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Keith D. Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for
reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on
his

28

U.S.C.

appealable

§ 2254

unless

(2006)
circuit

a

petition.
justice

The
or

order

judge

is

issues

not
a

certificate of appealability.

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006);

Reid

363,

v.

Angelone,

certificate

of

369

F.3d

appealability

369

will

(4th
not

Cir.

2004).
absent

issue

A
“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district
debatable

merits,
that

court’s
or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

Slack

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

standard

find

that

U.S.

the

claims

constitutional
529

by

is

473,

484

(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

motion

states

a

debatable

claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

Slack, 529 U.S.

at

the

484-85.

conclude

that

We

have

Wilson

independently
has

not

made

reviewed
the

record

requisite

and

showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss
the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts
2

Appeal: 11-7265

Document: 8

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 3 of 3

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3