Court Opinion

ID: 4189300
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-07-25 19:01:34.884228+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:24.508506
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                     UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                     No. 17-6429

JUAN CARLOS VAZQUEZ,

                   Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE,

                   Respondent - Appellee,

             and

ATTORNEY GEN ALAN WILSON,

                   Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:15-cv-04475-BHH)

Submitted: July 20, 2017                                     Decided: July 25, 2017

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Juan Carlos Vazquez, Appellant Pro Se. Susannah Rawl Cole, OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

                                            2
PER CURIAM:

       Juan Carlos Vazquez 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

(2012) petition, and its order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion for

reconsideration. The orders are 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 Vazquez 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