Stanley Williams v. Perry Correctional Institution
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
STANLEY WILLIAMS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (3:08-cv-00798-HFF-JRM)
August 20, 2008
August 29, 2008
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stanley Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Stanley Williams seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition for failure to prosecute and has filed an application for an original writ of habeas corpus with this court under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. (2000). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a 28
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). demonstrating that
A prisoner satisfies this standard by jurists would find that any
assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,
537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have
independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing. Although we are authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) to exercise jurisdiction over original petitions for habeas corpus relief, we are not required to do so and we typically decline to exercise such jurisdiction and instead transfer the matter to the appropriate district court. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(a). We will
not transfer a habeas corpus petition unless the transfer would serve the interests of justice. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2000). We
conclude that a transfer of this matter would not be in the interests of justice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny the motion for an original writ of habeas corpus, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?