McCorkle v. Peguese

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
McCorkle v. Peguese, 157 F. App'x 628 (4th Cir. 2005)

McCorkle v. Peguese

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Edward E. MeCorkle seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that MeCorkle has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a *629 certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 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

Reference

Full Case Name
Edward E. MCCORKLE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. James v. PEGUESE, Warden; J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Respondents—Appellees
Status
Unpublished