Court Opinion

ID: 1012936
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 20:52:47.110099+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:20.543039
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 03-7667

ROBERT EDGAR MOORE,

                                           Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE,

                                            Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (CA-02-888)

Submitted:   January 21, 2004             Decided:   March 31, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Edgar Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell,
Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

           Robert Edgar Moore seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000).   The order is appealable only if 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 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 Moore has not made the requisite showing.            Accordingly, we

deny Moore’s motion for 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 -