Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06485/USCOURTS-ca4-15-06485-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
John Pate
Appellee
Paul Anthony Rice
Appellant

Document Text:

ON REHEARING

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6485

PAUL ANTHONY RICE, a/k/a Paul Rice,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN JOHN PATE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

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

(4:14-cv-00185-MGL)

Submitted: December 30, 2015 Decided: January 5, 2016

Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Paul Anthony Rice, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant 

Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-6485 Doc: 16 Filed: 01/05/2016 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Paul Anthony Rice 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 

Rice has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a 

certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, deny Rice’s motion for transcripts at government 

expense, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument 

Appeal: 15-6485 Doc: 16 Filed: 01/05/2016 Pg: 2 of 3
3

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: 15-6485 Doc: 16 Filed: 01/05/2016 Pg: 3 of 3