Randy Cooper v. Thomas McBride, No. 08-6142 (4th Cir. 2008)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-6142 RANDY COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. THOMAS L. MCBRIDE, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent - Appellee. No. 08-6145 RANDY COOPER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. THOMAS L. MCBRIDE, Mount Olive Correctional Complex, Respondent - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:07-cv-00203; 3:07-cv-00495) Submitted: March 25, 2008 Decided: Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. March 31, 2008 Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randy Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Robert David Goldberg, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Randy Cooper seeks to appeal the district court s order accepting a magistrate judge s recommendation and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petitions as untimely filed. 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). records and showing. conclude and materials Cooper has not made the requisite Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals. facts that We have independently reviewed the legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the 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.