Dana Collins v. John Wolfe

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-02663-WDQ Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998798213]. Mailed to: Dana Collins. [11-7406]

Appeal: 11-7406

Document: 9

Date Filed: 02/28/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7406

DANA RUSSELL COLLINS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
JOHN S. WOLFE, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore.
William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:09-cv-02663-WDQ)

Submitted:

February 23, 2012

Decided:

February 28, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Dana Russell Collins, Appellant Pro Se.
Edward John Kelley,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7406

Document: 9

Date Filed: 02/28/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Dana
court’s

Russell

order

denying

petition.

Collins
relief

seeks

on

to

his

28

appeal
U.S.C.

district

§ 2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

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

the

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 Collins 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: 11-7406

before

Document: 9

Date Filed: 02/28/2012

the

and

court

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3