# Brown v. Virginia Beach Circuit Court

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 7, 2007 · 247 F. App'x 435

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1023626

## Case

- **Full name:** Michael John BROWN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. VIRGINIA BEACH CIRCUIT COURT, Respondent—Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 7, 2007
- **Citations:** 247 F. App'x 435
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Michael, King, Shedd
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1023626

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6713

MICHAEL JOHN BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

VIRGINIA BEACH CIRCUIT COURT,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (2:07-cv-00056-RBS)

Submitted: August 30, 2007 Decided: September 7, 2007

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael John Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Michael John Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)

petition because he failed to comply with the court’s order to cure

defects in his petition and to pay the filing fee or move to

proceed in forma pauperis. The order is 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 Brown has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny Brown’s motion for appointment of counsel,

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 -

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1023626. Public record. Not legal advice.