Lavern Ray Irwin v. Derrick Wadsworth

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6494
LAVERN RAY IRWIN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DERRICK WADSWORTH,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
JUANITA H. BAKER; JEWEL E. DUNN; CHARLES L.
MANN, SR.,
Respondents.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:05-hc-00162-BO)
Submitted: November 15, 2006 Decided: November 20, 2006
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lavern Ray Irwin, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Lavern Ray Irwin seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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 any
assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is
debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Irwin has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Irwin’s motions
to expand the record, 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

-- 3 of 3 --