Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-08-06594/USCOURTS-ca4-08-06594-0/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UNPUBLISHED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. 08-6594

MICHAEL LOUIS JOHNSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

COLIE RUSHTON, Warden; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of

South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior District

Judge. (6:06-cv-02544-SB)

Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 20, 2008

Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael Louis Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter,

III, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 08-6594 Doc: 13 Filed: 08/20/2008 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Michael Louis Johnson 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 (2000) petition. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability, deny his motions for appointment of counsel and to

compel for the production of documents and things, and we dismiss

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 08-6594 Doc: 13 Filed: 08/20/2008 Pg: 2 of 2