Saul Stanley v. Bobby Shearin

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cv-02713-CCB Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998478867] [10-6224]

Download PDF
Saul Stanley v. Bobby Shearin Doc. 0 Case: 10-6224 Document: 10 Date Filed: 12/06/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6224 SAUL JOSEPH STANLEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. BOBBY SHEARIN, Warden; DOUGLAS F. GANSLER, Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:09-cv-02713-CCB) Submitted: November 30, 2010 Decided: December 6, 2010 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Saul Joseph Stanley, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-6224 Document: 10 Date Filed: 12/06/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Saul Joseph Stanley seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice See 28 U.S.C. or judge issues a certificate of appealability. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). issue absent "a A certificate of appealability will not showing of the denial of a substantial constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). 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. 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 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. 529 U.S. at 484-85. Slack, We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stanley 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 2 Case: 10-6224 Document: 10 Date Filed: 12/06/2010 Page: 3 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3

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?