Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06587/USCOURTS-ca4-16-06587-0/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UNPUBLISHED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. 16-6587

TYRONE BEATY,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE,

Respondent – Appellee,

and

ALAN WILSON,

Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. Richard M. Gergel, District Judge. 

(4:15-cv-03707-RMG)

Submitted: September 13, 2016 Decided: September 15, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Beaty, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, 

Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Appeal: 16-6587 Doc: 12 Filed: 09/15/2016 Pg: 1 of 4
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6587 Doc: 12 Filed: 09/15/2016 Pg: 2 of 4
3

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Beaty seeks to appeal the district court’s order

adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and 

dismissing 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. 

 * Because Beaty objected only to the magistrate judge’s 

recommendation to dismiss his prosecutorial misconduct claim, he 

has waived appellate review of the district court’s disposition 

of his other claims. Massey v. Ojanit, 759 F.3d 343, 352 (4th 

Cir. 2014).

Appeal: 16-6587 Doc: 12 Filed: 09/15/2016 Pg: 3 of 4
4

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Beaty 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 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 16-6587 Doc: 12 Filed: 09/15/2016 Pg: 4 of 4