Court Opinion

ID: 1013827
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 21:07:18.123813+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:13.580798
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                             No. 04-6248

RUBEN BENJAMIN SNIPES,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

THEODIS BECK, Secretary, North Carolina
Department of Corrections,

                                            Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
Judge. (CA-02-887)

Submitted:   July 15, 2004                 Decided:   July 21, 2004

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronnie Monroe Mitchell, Coy E. Brewer, Jr., MITCHELL, BREWER,
RICHARDSON, ADAMS, BURNS & BOUGHMAN, Fayetteville, North Carolina,
for Appellant.     Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

             Ruben Benjamin Snipes, who is no longer a state prisoner,

seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his petition

filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).            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 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).               We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Snipes has not made the

requisite     showing.      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 -