Stroman v. Reynolds , 294 F. App'x 15 ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •                                 UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 08-6571
    BOBBY STROMAN,
    Petitioner -    Appellant,
    v.
    CECILIA REYNOLDS, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-02738-HMH)
    Submitted:   September 16, 2008          Decided:   September 22, 2008
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Bobby Stroman, Appellant Pro Se.      Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
    Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Bobby Stroman 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
     (2000) petition.                   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 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    Stroman   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: 08-6571

Citation Numbers: 294 F. App'x 15

Judges: Motz, Traxler, Shedd

Filed Date: 9/22/2008

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024