Bass v. Shearin, (4th Cir. 2010)

Status: Not Published

Docket Number: 09-7923

Linked as:

Text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7923

GOLD LEROY BASS, JR.,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BOBBY P. SHEARIN, Warden, Western Correctional Institution;

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge.

(1:08-cv-01839-JFM)

Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 4, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank M. Dunbaugh, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellant. Edward

John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,

Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Gold Leroy Bass, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his 28U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as successive and untimely. The order is 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." 28U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bass has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Bass' motion to accelerate case processing, 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.