Torriano Williams v. Dunlap

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 8:11-cv-00645-JMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998784491]. Mailed to: Torriano Williams. [11-7110]

Download PDF
Appeal: 11-7110 Document: 12 Date Filed: 02/09/2012 Page: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-7110 TORRIANO DARNELL WILLIAMS, Petitioner – Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; COUNTY OF FLORENCE; WARDEN DUNLAP, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (8:11-cv-00645-JMC) Submitted: January 30, 2012 Decided: February 9, 2012 Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Torriano Darnell Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 11-7110 Document: 12 Date Filed: 02/09/2012 Page: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Torriano Darnell Williams, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2011) petition. appealable unless a circuit certificate of appealability. A certificate of justice The order is not or judge issues a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). 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 demonstrating district debatable merits, that court’s or a When the district court denies prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find that U.S. the claims constitutional 529 by is 473, 484 (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. Slack, 529 U.S. at the 484-85. conclude that We have Williams independently has not reviewed made the record requisite and 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 Appeal: 11-7110 before Document: 12 the court Date Filed: 02/09/2012 and argument would Page: 3 of 3 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?