Court Opinion

ID: 1009989
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 20:04:41.875678+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:35:31.181835
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                          FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 02-7910

LARRY D. PHILLIPS,

                                              Petitioner - Appellant,

             versus

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department
of Corrections,

                                                Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (CA-01-700-2)

Submitted:    February 20, 2003              Decided:   March 12, 2003

Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry D. Phillips, Appellant Pro Se. Linwood Theodore Wells, Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Larry D. Phillips seeks to appeal the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying

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

appeal may not be taken 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, as here,

a district court dismisses a § 2254 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 reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons

stated by the district court that Phillips has not made the

requisite showing.     See Phillips v. Johnson, No. CA-01-700-2 (E.D.

Va.   Dec.   5,   2002).   Accordingly,   we   deny   a   certificate   of

appealability and dismiss the appeal.          We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

                                   2
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

                                                        DISMISSED

                                3