Jamar Shante Paxton v. D. BRAXTON, Warden

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7848
JAMAR SHANTE PAXTON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
D. BRAXTON, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District
Judge. (CA-04-894)
Submitted: April 20, 2006 Decided: April 25, 2006
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jamar Shante Paxton, Appellant Pro Se. Margaret Winslow Reed,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Jamar Shante Paxton seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders 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
§ 2254 proceeding 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 the district
court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or
wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district
court is likewise debatable. 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 Paxton 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 of 2 --