Court Opinion

ID: 1010439
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 20:11:37.037143+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:23.101993
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 02-7845

JOSEPH SLEDGE, JR.,

                                            Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

                                             Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief
District Judge. (CA-02-692-5-BO)

Submitted:   April 24, 2003                    Decided:   May 1, 2003

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Sledge, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

       Joseph Sledge, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a

habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability.           28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000).

When   a   district   court   dismisses    a    habeas     petition    solely   on

procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue

unless the petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of

reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid

claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that

jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district

court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000)), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001).              We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Sledge has not made the

requisite showing.      See Miller-El v. Cockrell,              U.S.    , 123 S.

Ct.    1029   (2003).     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.

                                                                       DISMISSED

                                     2