Court Opinion

ID: 4510262
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-02-25 20:00:22.10702+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:13:26.654849
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                      No. 19-7504

LEROY L. STATON,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

SUPERINTENDENT LEE CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

                    Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Anderson. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (8:19-cv-01805-TMC)

Submitted: February 20, 2020                                 Decided: February 25, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leroy Staton, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Leroy Staton seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation

of the magistrate judge and dismissing Staton’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2018) petition as an

unauthorized, successive § 2254 petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2018).

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) (2018). 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 Staton 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