McFadden v. State of South Carolina , 403 F. App'x 848 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-7130
    BERNARD MCFADDEN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; ROBERT RICHBURG, Investigator for
    Sumter County Police Department; HENRY MCMASTER, South
    Carolina Attorney General,
    Respondents - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Columbia. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
    (3:10-cv-01544-RBH)
    Submitted:   November 18, 2010              Decided:   December 1, 2010
    Before SHEDD and     AGEE,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Bernard McFadden, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Bernard McFadden, a state pretrial detainee, seeks to
    appeal   the     district       court’s     orders       denying    relief       on    his    
    28 U.S.C.A. § 2241
     (West 2006 & Supp. 2010) 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).                    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       McFadden    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
    2
    before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional
    process.
    DISMISSED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-7130

Citation Numbers: 403 F. App'x 848

Judges: Shedd, Agee, Hamilton

Filed Date: 12/1/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024