Valiente-Rabanales v. Johnson

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-7606 SANTOS VALIENTE-RABANALES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus GENE JOHNSON, Director of the Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:05-cv-01179-CMH) Submitted: January 18, 2007 Decided: January 23, 2007 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Santos Valiente-Rabanales, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Santos Valiente-Rabanales 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 Valiente-Rabanales 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 -