John Lee, Jr. v. J. Curran, Jr., No. 08-8549 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8549 JOHN WESLEY LEE, JR., Petitioner Appellant, v. JOHN JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., The Attorney General of the State of Maryland; JON P. GALLEY, Warden; WARDEN BOBBY SHEARIN, Respondents Appellees. No. 09-6126 JOHN WESLEY LEE, JR., Petitioner Appellant, v. JOHN JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., The Attorney General of the State of Maryland; JON P. GALLEY, Warden; WARDEN BOBBY SHEARIN, Respondents Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (8:00-cv-03323-CCB) Submitted: June 16, 2009 Decided: July 10, 2009 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior No. 08-8549 dismissed; No. 09-6126 affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Wesley Lee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: John Wesley Lee, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court s order petition. motion denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) He also appeals the district court s dismissal of his for injunctive relief. We deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in No. 08-8549 and affirm the district court in No. 09-6126. As to No. 08-8549, the district court s order is not appealable unless certificate (2006). of a circuit justice appealability. See or 28 judge U.S.C. issues a § 2253(c)(1) A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. standard § 2253(c)(2) by (2006). demonstrating that A prisoner reasonable satisfies jurists would this 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. 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, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). conclude that We have Lee independently has not made reviewed the the record requisite and showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 3 As to No. 09-6126, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, reasons stated by the district court. cv-03323-CCB (D. Md. Dec. 11, 2008). we affirm for the Lee v. Shearin, No. 8:00We 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. 08-8549 DISMISSED No. 09-6126 AFFIRMED 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.