Filed: May 06, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7884 TIMOTHY EARL GREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN DENNIS BUSH, Lee CI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (2:14-cv-02405-MGL) Submitted: April 24, 2015 Decided: May 6, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timot
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7884 TIMOTHY EARL GREEN, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN DENNIS BUSH, Lee CI, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (2:14-cv-02405-MGL) Submitted: April 24, 2015 Decided: May 6, 2015 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Timoth..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-7884
TIMOTHY EARL GREEN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN DENNIS BUSH, Lee CI,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge.
(2:14-cv-02405-MGL)
Submitted: April 24, 2015 Decided: May 6, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Timothy Earl Green, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Earl Green seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
(2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies
relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by
demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the
district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is
debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel,
529 U.S. 473, 484
(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural
ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable
claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
Slack, 529 U.S.
at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Green has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3