Filed: Apr. 07, 2006
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7801 ERVIN ALLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RAYMOND COLLERAN; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-05-282-DCN) Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 7, 2006 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-7801 ERVIN ALLISON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RAYMOND COLLERAN; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-05-282-DCN) Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 7, 2006 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished ..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7801
ERVIN ALLISON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
RAYMOND COLLERAN; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney
General of the State of South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CA-05-282-DCN)
Submitted: March 30, 2006 Decided: April 7, 2006
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Ervin Allison, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy
Attorney General, Columbia South Carolina; Jeffrey Alan Jacobs,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Ervin Allison seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting
summary judgment to Respondents and dismissing as untimely
Allison’s petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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 his
constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive
procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
wrong. 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 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the
record and conclude that Allison has not made the requisite
showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal. 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
- 2 -