Opinion
No. 07-5419.
Filed On: September 24, 2008.
BEFORE: Sentelle, Chief Judge, and Ginsburg and Tatel, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Upon consideration of the notice of appeal, construed as including a request for a certificate of appealability; and the motion to dismiss appeal for lack of a certificate of appealability, and the responses thereto, it is
ORDERED that the request for a certificate of appealability be denied and the motion to dismiss appeal granted. A certificate of appealability is not warranted in this case because appellant has not made "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and because he has not shown that reasonable jurists could find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Appellant's admission to the hearing officer that he had used illegal drugs and failed to submit to drug testing as required formed a rational basis to support appellee's conclusion that appellant had violated the conditions of his parole. See Rockingham v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 523 F. Supp. 2d 38, 43 (D.D.C. 2007).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. Because no certificate of appealability has been allowed, no mandate will issue.