UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-6320
VINCENT EUGENE WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
L. K. KELLY, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate
Judge. (3:06-cv-00357-MHL)
Submitted: June 15, 2007 Decided: June 21, 2007
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vincent Eugene Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Banci Enga Tewolde,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Vincent Eugene Williams seeks to appeal the magistrate
judge’s orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)
petition and motion to reconsider.* 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 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 Williams has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny Williams’ motions for a certificate
of appealability, for oral argument, for appointment of counsel,
and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
*
The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).
- 2 -
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -