Roger Deal, Sr. v. Michael Bell, No. 08-8606 (4th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-8606 ROGER LEE DEAL, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. MICHAEL BELL, Respondent - Appellee. No. 09-6070 ROGER LEE DEAL, SR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. MICHAEL BELL, Respondent - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:08-hc-02132-FL) Submitted: May 21, 2009 Decided: Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. May 27, 2009 Roger Lee Deal, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Roger court s order Lee Deal, Sr., dismissing as seeks to successive appeal his 28 the district U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and the court s subsequent order denying his request for a certificate of appealability. appealable unless certificate (2006). of a circuit justice appealability. See The orders are not 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. record and conclude showing. 2001). We that have Deal independently has not made reviewed the the requisite Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals. 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 3

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.