# Robinson v. Jackson

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · March 9, 2009 · 315 F. App'x 493

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/1028190

## Case

- **Full name:** Keith Douglas ROBINSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Herbert JACKSON, Superintendent, Brown Creek Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** March 9, 2009
- **Citations:** 315 F. App'x 493
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Traxler, King, Hamilton
- **Cited by:** 1 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/1028190

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7943

KEITH DOUGLAS ROBINSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HERBERT JACKSON, Superintendent, Brown Creek Correctional
Institution,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen,
Senior District Judge. (5:08-cv-00068-GCM)

Submitted: February 20, 2009 Decided: March 9, 2009

Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith Douglas Robinson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Keith Douglas Robinson seeks to appeal the district

court’s order dismissing as untimely 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). 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 Robinson has

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Robinson’s

motion for 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/1028190. Public record. Not legal advice.