UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6982
KENNETH E. ROBINSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
LAWRENCE M. SOLOMON,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 06-7081
In Re: KENNETH E. ROBINSON,
Petitioner.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior
District Judge. (5:05-hc-00116-H)
Submitted: October 31, 2006 Decided: November 6, 2006
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
No. 06-6982 dismissed; No. 06-7081 petition denied by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Kenneth E. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Alvin William Keller, Jr.,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
In No. 06-6982, Kenneth E. Robinson seeks to appeal the
district court’s orders granting summary judgment to Respondent and
dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(2000), and denying his motion for reconsideration. The orders are
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 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, 336-38 (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 Robinson has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal in No. 06-6982.*
Robinson petitions for a writ of mandamus in No. 06-7081,
alleging the district court has unduly delayed acting on his § 2254
*
We also note that Robinson’s § 2254 petition is a successive
petition. Robinson filed a prior § 2254 petition in the District
Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
- 3 -
petition. He seeks an order from this court directing the district
court to act. Because the district court rendered a final order in
the case, we find there has been no undue delay in the district
court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, we deny the mandamus petition in No. 06-7081. We also
deny Robinson’s motion for appointment of counsel. 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.
No. 06-6982, DISMISSED;
No. 06-7081, PETITION DENIED
- 4 -