Casey Stuckey v. State of South Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998336888-2], updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 0:09-cv-00203-HFF Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998473184] [10-6549]

Download PDF
Casey Stuckey v. State of South Carolina Doc. 0 Case: 10-6549 Document: 10 Date Filed: 11/29/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6549 CASEY STUCKEY, Petitioner Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH INSTITUTION, CAROLINA; WARDEN LEE CORRECTIONAL Respondents Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (0:09-cv-00203-HFF) Submitted: November 18, 2010 AGEE, Circuit Decided: Judges, and November 29, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior Before SHEDD and Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Casey Stuckey, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-6549 Document: 10 Date Filed: 11/29/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Casey Stuckey 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 (2006) 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) (2006). 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) (2006). relief on the merits, that a When the district court denies satisfies would this standard that claims 473, by the is 484 prisoner demonstrating district debatable reasonable of v. jurists the find court's or assessment Slack constitutional 529 U.S. wrong. McDaniel, (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. at 484-85. that we We have independently has not made motion reviewed the for Slack, 529 U.S. the record and conclude Stuckey deny requisite a showing. of Accordingly, Stuckey's certificate appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 Case: 10-6549 Document: 10 Date Filed: 11/29/2010 Page: 3 presented in the materials 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?