Marlon Rivera v. Warden Tyger River , 707 F. App'x 136 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 17-7369
    MARLON RIVERA,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN TYGER RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
    Respondent - Appellee,
    and
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
    Respondent.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
    Orangeburg. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (5:17-cv-02011-MGL)
    Submitted: December 19, 2017                                Decided: December 22, 2017
    Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Marlon Rivera, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Marlon Rivera seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
    recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 
    28 U.S.C. § 2254
     (2012)
    petition without prejudice as an unauthorized successive 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 Rivera has not
    made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny
    Rivera’s motion for transcripts at government expense, 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: 17-7369

Citation Numbers: 707 F. App'x 136

Filed Date: 12/22/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023