Court Opinion

ID: 212791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-03-18 20:05:10+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:12.830147
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 10-7640

KEITH BERNARD BRUCE,

                Petitioner – Appellant,

          v.

ELAINE ROBINSON, Warden,

                Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort.     Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (9:09-cv-01383-RMG)

Submitted:   March 15, 2011                 Decided:   March 18, 2011

Before MOTZ and    WYNN,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Keith Bernard Bruce, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

              Keith      Bernard       Bruce       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).                          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        Bruce   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

                                               2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED

                                    3