Court Opinion

ID: 9930901
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-07 21:00:49.858963+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:09:31.142010
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6949      Doc: 11          Filed: 02/06/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                                UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6949

        WILLIE JOHNSON,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        WARDEN KENNETH NELSON,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort.
        Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (9:23-cv-02864-RMG)

        Submitted: January 30, 2024                                       Decided: February 6, 2024

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Willie Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6949      Doc: 11          Filed: 02/06/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Willie Johnson, a South Carolina prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order

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

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

        successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

        of appealability. 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 the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this

        standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment

        of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17

        (2017). 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. 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 Johnson has not

        made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

        dismiss the appeal. We deny Johnson’s motion for the appointment of counsel. 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