Court Opinion

ID: 9957254
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-03 21:01:35.166108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:14.165300
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7117      Doc: 5        Filed: 04/02/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-7117

        JOSEPH H. GIBBS,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        WARDEN OF BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Charleston. Joseph Dawson, III, District Judge. (2:21-cv-03206-JD)

        Submitted: March 28, 2024                                           Decided: April 2, 2024

        Before KING and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Joseph Hugo Gibbs, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7117         Doc: 5      Filed: 04/02/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Joseph H. Gibbs, a South Carolina prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order

        accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, construing Gibbs’ 28 U.S.C. § 2241

        petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition, and dismissing the petition as successive and

        unauthorized. Gibbs also seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying reconsideration.

        The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

        appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 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). When, as here, 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. Gonzalez v.

        Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

               We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Gibbs 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

                                                     2