Wayne Leneau v. Warden, Kershaw Correctional

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:09-cv-01781-CMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998450333] [10-6793]

Wayne Leneau v. Warden, Kershaw Correctional

Doc. 0

Case: 10-6793 Document: 10

Date Filed: 10/21/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6793 WAYNE DOUGLAS LENEAU, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN, KERSHAW CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (4:09-cv-01781-CMC) Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 21, 2010

Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wayne Douglas Leneau, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-6793 Document: 10

Date Filed: 10/21/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Wayne court's judge order Douglas accepting as Leneau the seeks to appeal of the the § district

recommendation his 28

magistrate (2006)

and

dismissing

moot

U.S.C.

2254

petition. or judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 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 Leneau 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: 10-6793 Document: 10

Date Filed: 10/21/2010

Page: 3

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. DISMISSED

3