Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07884/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07884-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dennis Bush
Appellee
Timothy Earl Green
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7884

TIMOTHY EARL GREEN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN DENNIS BUSH, Lee CI,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

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

(2:14-cv-02405-MGL)

Submitted: April 24, 2015 Decided: May 6, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Earl Green, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 14-7884 Doc: 10 Filed: 05/06/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Earl Green 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 

Green has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

Appeal: 14-7884 Doc: 10 Filed: 05/06/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7884 Doc: 10 Filed: 05/06/2015 Pg: 3 of 3