Joseph Campbell v. State of South Carolina , 459 F. App'x 218 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 11-7193
    JOSEPH J. CAMPBELL,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Aiken. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge.
    (1:10-cv-00973-RMG)
    Submitted:   December 15, 2011            Decided:   December 20, 2011
    Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Joseph J. Campbell, Appellant Pro Se.     Donald John Zelenka,
    Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Joseph     J.    Campbell     seeks      to    appeal       the     district
    court’s    order    accepting      the     recommendation         of    the     magistrate
    judge and dismissing as untimely his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2006)
    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) (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 Campbell 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: 11-7193

Citation Numbers: 459 F. App'x 218

Judges: Davis, Gregory, Per Curiam, Shedd

Filed Date: 12/20/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023