Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07198/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07198-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bernard McKie
Appellee
Robert Troy Taylor
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7198

ROBERT TROY TAYLOR,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

BERNARD MCKIE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Richard Mark Gergel, District 

Judge. (5:13-cv-02239-RMG)

Submitted: January 29, 2015 Decided: March 30, 2015

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

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Troy Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7198 Doc: 12 Filed: 03/30/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Troy Taylor seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order accepting in part 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 Taylor 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: 14-7198 Doc: 12 Filed: 03/30/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7198 Doc: 12 Filed: 03/30/2015 Pg: 3 of 3