Hunt v. Robinson, 4th Cir. (2002)

Download as pdf
Download as pdf
You are on page 1of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7308

RAHEEM JABBAR HUNT,


Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DAVID ROBINSON, Warden, Nottoway Correctional
Center,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
District Judge. (CA-01-802-3)

Submitted:

November 7, 2002

Decided:

November 15, 2002

Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Clay Chrisman, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Robert


H. Anderson, III, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).

PER CURIAM:
Raheem Jabbar Hunt seeks to appeal the district courts order
denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000).
An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a
habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of
arises out of process issued by a state court 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


for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

28

As to claims dismissed by a district

court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability


will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both (1)
that

jurists

of

reason

would

find

it

debatable

whether

the

petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional


right and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable
whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.
Rose v. Lee, 252 F. 3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001) (quoting Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

We have reviewed the record

and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Hunt
has not satisfied either standard. See Hunt v. Robinson, No. CA-01802-3 (E.D. Va. Aug. 6, 2002).

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

You might also like