Mark Elliott v. Aaron Joyner ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 18-7245
    MARK ALLEN ELLIOTT,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    MR. AARON S. JOYNER, Warden at Lee Correctional Inst.,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock
    Hill. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (0:17-cv-02745-JMC)
    Submitted: July 16, 2019                                          Decided: July 18, 2019
    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    William Glenn Yarborough, III, WILLIAM G. YARBOROUGH III, ATTORNEY AT
    LAW, LLC, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Melody Jane Brown, Senior
    Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Sherrie Ann
    Butterbaugh, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
    Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Mark Allen Elliott 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 Elliott 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 presented in the materials before
    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-7245

Filed Date: 7/18/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/18/2019