Court Opinion

ID: 215122
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-04-20 19:58:25+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:22.799625
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 10-7437

MICHELLE CATHERINE THEER,

                Petitioner – Appellant,

          v.

ADMINISTRATOR ANNIE HARVEY,

                Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:09-hc-02056-BO)

Submitted:   April 5, 2011                  Decided:   April 20, 2011

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michelle Catherine Theer, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis,
Assistant  Attorney   General,  Raleigh,  North Carolina,  for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Michelle Catherine Theer seeks to appeal the district

court’s    order    denying      relief    on    her     28    U.S.C.     § 2254    (2006)

petition.     The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability.                           See 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2006).             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).            When     the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies

this    standard     by    demonstrating        that   reasonable         jurists      would

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional

claims is debatable or wrong.               Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484    (2000);     see    Miller-El   v.    Cockrell,         537 U.S. 322,    336-38

(2003).     When the district court denies relief on procedural

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                            Slack,
529 U.S. at 484-85.           We have independently reviewed the record

and    conclude    that    Theer    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

                                            2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED

                                    3