Case ID: f-appx_104/html/0357-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Dawud Yamini ISLAM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 04-6678.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 12, 2004.
    Decided: Aug. 18, 2004.
    Dawud Yamini Islam, Appellant pro se.
    Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Dawud Yamini Islam appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition by the district court. An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding 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 jurists of reason would find that his constitutional claims are debatable 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, 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 (4th Cir.2001).

We have reviewed the record and conclude that Islam has not made the requisite showing. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We further deny Islam’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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 in the decisional process.

DISMISSED