Case ID: f-appx_89/html/0825-02.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

William Allen LEGG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Dr. HELSEL; Dr. Petrivech; Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 03-7638.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 19, 2004.
    Decided Feb. 25, 2004.
    
      William Allen Legg, Appellant pro se.
    Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

William Allen Legg seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) without prejudice. 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 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 independently reviewed the record and conclude that Legg has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Legg’s motions for injunction, habeas corpus and discovery; 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