Broach v. Stevenson , 357 F. App'x 544 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7092
    WILLIAM BROACH,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    ROBERT STEVENSON, Warden,
    Respondent – Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill.     Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (0:08-cv-01627-HMH)
    Submitted:    October 29, 2009              Decided:   December 17, 2009
    Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Broach, Appellant Pro Se.    Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
    Assistant Attorney General, James Anthony Mabry, Assistant
    Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    William Broach 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
     (2006) petition.                              The
    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
    a certificate of appealability.                 
    28 U.S.C. § 2253
    (c)(1) (2006).
    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)        (2006).        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).         We    have   independently        reviewed      the   record   and
    conclude      that    Broach       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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-7092

Citation Numbers: 357 F. App'x 544

Judges: Michael, Motz, Agee

Filed Date: 12/17/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024