Stanley Williams v. Sidney Harkleroad

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:03-cv-00299-TDS-WWD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998754669]. Mailed to: Stanley Williams. [11-7061]

Appeal: 11-7061

Document: 13

Date Filed: 12/30/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7061

STANLEY LORENZO WILLIAMS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
SIDNEY HARKLEROAD, Superintendent; THEODIS BECK, Secretary
of Corrections,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:03-cv-00299-TDS-WWD)

Submitted:

December 21, 2011

Decided:

December 30, 2011

Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Sandra WallaceSmith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7061

Document: 13

Date Filed: 12/30/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Stanley Lorenzo Williams seeks to appeal the district
court’s order affirming and adopting the order of the magistrate
judge and denying relief on Williams’ post-judgment motion in
his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) action.
unless

a

circuit

appealability.

justice

or

The order is not appealable

judge

issues

a

certificate

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).

of

A certificate

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2006).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

ruling

is

debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the
denial of a constitutional right.
We

have

independently

reviewed

the

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.
record

and

Williams has not made the requisite showing.

conclude

that

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 11-7061

Document: 13

Date Filed: 12/30/2011

Page: 3 of 3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3