Pinckney v. Ozmint , 258 F. App'x 570 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-6981
    JOHN PINCKNEY,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    JON OZMINT, Director of SCDC; HENRY MCMASTER,
    Attorney General of South Carolina; ANTHONY
    PADULA, Warden of the Lee Correctional
    Institution,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Beaufort.    Patrick Michael Duffy, District
    Judge. (9:06-cv-02274-PMD)
    Submitted:   November 30, 2007         Decided:     December 20, 2007
    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John Pinckney, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
    for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    John Pinckney seeks to appeal the district court’s order
    dismissing as untimely 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 Pinckney 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: 07-6981

Citation Numbers: 258 F. App'x 570

Judges: Motz, Traxler, Gregory

Filed Date: 12/20/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024