Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-17-06066/USCOURTS-ca4-17-06066-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-6066

MARLON RIVERA,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

SCOTT LEWIS, Warden (PCI),

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. 

(5:16-cv-00837-MGL)

Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: February 28, 2017

Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marlon Rivera, Appellant Pro Se. Alphonso Simon, Jr., Assistant 

Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney 

General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-6066 Doc: 8 Filed: 02/28/2017 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Marlon Rivera 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 (2012) 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 and dismiss the appeal. We deny 

Rivera’s motions for appointment of counsel and for a transcript

at government expense. We dispense with oral argument because 

Appeal: 17-6066 Doc: 8 Filed: 02/28/2017 Pg: 2 of 3
3

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 17-6066 Doc: 8 Filed: 02/28/2017 Pg: 3 of 3