Court Opinion

ID: 2670683
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-04-21 19:23:26.4069+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:16.319442
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                              No. 13-7879

MAURICIO E. WEBER, a/k/a Mauricio Esteban Weber,

                       Petitioner – Appellant,

          v.

DIRECTOR OF ANDERSON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER,

                       Respondent – Appellee,

          and

SC ATTORNEY GENERAL; JOHN SKIPPER, JR.,

                       Respondents.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.     G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (8:13-cv-02339-GRA)

Submitted:   April 17, 2014                 Decided:   April 21, 2014

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mauricio E. Weber, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

              Maurice E. Weber appeals the district court’s order

accepting      the       recommendation      of      the    magistrate      judge        and

dismissing       without       prejudice     his       28   U.S.C.      § 2241     (2012)

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) (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 Weber 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

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

                                            2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                      DISMISSED

                                  3