Court Opinion

ID: 814441
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-12-27 20:13:58+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:00:51.886261
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 12-7432

CHARLES ANDRAE GRAYTON,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

WARDEN LIEBER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

                Respondent – Appellee,

          and

DIRECTOR WILLIAM BYARS, Department of Corrections,

                Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.   Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (8:11-cv-002576-CMC)

Submitted:   December 20, 2012              Decided:   December 27, 2012

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Andrae Grayton, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                2
PER CURIAM:

               Charles Andrae Grayton 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 Grayton 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

                                   4