Michael McEvily v. Gene M. Johnson

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6576
MICHAEL MCEVILY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
GENE M. JOHNSON,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (2:07-cv-00594-RBS-JEB)
Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 3, 2008
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael McEvily, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Michael McEvily seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration
of 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); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369
(4th Cir. 2004). 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 McEvily 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 --