Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07556/USCOURTS-ca4-14-07556-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
David Ballard
Appellee
Benny Ray Roberts
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7556

BENNY RAY ROBERTS,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Mount Olive Correctional Complex,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior

District Judge. (1:13-cv-23245)

Submitted: March 31, 2015 Decided: April 3, 2015

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Benny Ray Roberts, Appellant Pro Se. Scott E. Johnson, Laura 

Young, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, 

Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7556 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/03/2015 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Benny Ray Roberts 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 

Roberts 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 

Appeal: 14-7556 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/03/2015 Pg: 2 of 3
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

Appeal: 14-7556 Doc: 9 Filed: 04/03/2015 Pg: 3 of 3