Court Opinion

ID: 1014107
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 21:11:31.474166+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:31:17.963414
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 04-6774

JAHLIL LARON A. KIDD,

                                               Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

SUSSEX I STATE PRISON,

                                                Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.  Claude M. Hilton, Chief
District Judge. (CA-03-1438-A)

Submitted:   August 12, 2004                 Decided:   August 19, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jahlil Laron A. Kidd, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

              Jahlil Laron A. Kidd seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. Kidd cannot

appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a

certificate of appealability, and 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 habeas

appellant meets 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 Kidd 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 -