Court Opinion

ID: 3152541
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-11-05 20:00:55.826453+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:07:53.654854
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 15-6682

JOHN DANIEL SPRINGER,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

DENNIS BUSH, Warden,

                Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill.      Bruce H. Hendricks, District
Judge. (0:13-cv-03549-BHH)

Submitted:   October 30, 2015             Decided:   November 5, 2015

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Daniel Springer, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

        John Daniel Springer 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 and the

court’s    order     denying    Springer’s        motion     for    reconsideration.

The orders are 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

Springer 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

                                           2
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                      DISMISSED

                                  3