Chapman v. Wallace, (4th Cir. 2010)

Federal Circuits

Linked as:

Text


UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7335

BRIAN RICHARD CHAPMAN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

C. F. WALLACE, Warden; VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS;

LUNENBURG CORRECTIONAL CENTER,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District

Judge. (7:10-cv-00004-sgw-mfu)

Submitted: December 16, 2010 Decided: December 29, 2010

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian Richard Chapman, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa

Armstrong, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Brian Richard Chapman seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28U.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). 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 (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 petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Chapman 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.

Sponsored links




ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.

Contents in vLex United States

Explore vLex

For Professionals

For Partners

Company