Court Opinion

ID: 813450
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-12-13 19:58:50+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:00:48.673785
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 12-7578

VERNARD JEROME MATHIS,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden McCormick Correctional Institution,

                Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken.    Richard M. Gergel, District Judge.
(1:11-cv-02383-RMG)

Submitted:   December 6, 2012             Decided:   December 12, 2012

Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeremy A. Thompson, LAW OFFICE OF JEREMY A. THOMPSON, LLC,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.    Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy   Assistant  Attorney  General,   Alphonso   Simon,  Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

              Vernard      Jerome    Mathis      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)(A) (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).                        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 Mathis 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
contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                               DISMISSED

                                   3