Tommy Riley v. Leroy Cartledge

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 6:10-cv-01340-JMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998723624]. Mailed to: Tommy Riley. [11-7027]

Appeal: 11-7027

Document: 6

Date Filed: 11/16/2011

Page: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7027

TOMMY RILEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
LEROY
CARTLEDGE,
Institution,

Warden

of

McCormick

Correctional

Respondent - Appellee,
and
JON OZMINT,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (6:10-cv-01340-JMC)

Submitted:

November 2, 2011

Decided:

November 16, 2011

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tommy Riley, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Appeal: 11-7027

Document: 6

Date Filed: 11/16/2011

Page: 2 of 4

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 11-7027

Document: 6

Date Filed: 11/16/2011

Page: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Tommy Riley seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting

the

recommendation

of

the

magistrate

judge

and

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

absent

“a

of

appealability.

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

28

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006).

of

a

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.

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484

Cockrell,

(2000);

(2003).

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

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.
and

conclude

that

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record
Riley

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

3

Appeal: 11-7027

before

Document: 6

Date Filed: 11/16/2011

the

and

court

argument

would

Page: 4 of 4

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
DISMISSED

4