Anthony C. Foster v. George Snyder

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-8037
ANTHONY C. FOSTER,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
GEORGE SNYDER,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION,
Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:07-hc-02172-BO)
Submitted: March 19, 2009 Decided: April 9, 2009
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Anthony C. Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, Rudolf
A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

PER CURIAM:
Anthony C. Foster, originally convicted and sentenced
in the superior court of the District of Columbia, seeks to
appeal the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(2006) petition challenging the United States Parole
Commission’s revocation of his parole. The order is not
appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); see
Madley v. United States Parole Comm’n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C.
Cir. 2002). 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) (2006). A prisoner satisfies
this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would
find that 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 Foster 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
2

-- 2 of 3 --

3
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --