Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07427/USCOURTS-ca4-09-07427-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Sammie Goodwin
Appellant
Elaine Robinson
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7427

SAMMIE GOODWIN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ELAINE ROBINSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(3:08-cv-02485-RBH)

Submitted: April 20, 2010 Decided: June 1, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sammie Goodwin, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry, 

Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy 

Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-7427 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/01/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Sammie Goodwin 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 (2006) petition. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 

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) (2006). 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 Goodwin has not made the requisite 

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 

and dismiss the appeal. We grant Goodwin’s motion to supplement 

his informal brief and 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: 09-7427 Doc: 14 Filed: 06/01/2010 Pg: 2 of 2