Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-07243/USCOURTS-ca4-07-07243-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Forsyth County
Appellee
Roberta Moore
Appellant
State of North Carolina
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-7243 

ROBERTA MOORE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; FORSYTH COUNTY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Russell A. Eliason,

Magistrate Judge. (1:06-cv-00997-RAE)

Submitted: November 20, 2007 Decided: November 29, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Roberta Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH

CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-7243 Doc: 13 Filed: 11/29/2007 Pg: 1 of 2
*

The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate

judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Roberta Moore seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s

order dismissing as untimely her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition.*

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 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. 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 Moore has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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

Appeal: 07-7243 Doc: 13 Filed: 11/29/2007 Pg: 2 of 2