Boyd. v. Haynes

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7898

HAROLD BOYD, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

SUPERINTENDENT J. HAYNES,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:07-hc-02081-FL)

Submitted: July 1, 2010 Decided: July 15, 2010

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Harold Boyd, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Harold Boyd, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.

The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a

constitutional right.” Id. § 2253(c)(2). When the district

court has denied relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that “reasonable jurists would find

the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims

debatable or wrong.” Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000). When the district court has denied 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. Id.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude Boyd 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 before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED