Small v. Bodison , 357 F. App'x 516 ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 09-7274
    CLARENCE SMALL,
    Petitioner – Appellant,
    v.
    MCKITHER BODISON,
    Respondent – Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia.    Henry F. Floyd, District Judge.
    (3:08-cv-02828-HFF)
    Submitted:    December 15, 2009             Decided:   December 18, 2009
    Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Clarence Small, Appellant Pro Se. Alphonso Simon, Jr., OFFICE
    OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Clarence Small 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.           See    
    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.                          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
    , 683-84 (4th
    Cir.    2001).        We   have    independently          reviewed     the    record   and
    conclude       that    Small      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: 09-7274

Citation Numbers: 357 F. App'x 516

Judges: Michael, Duncan, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/18/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024