Joseph Campbell v. State of South Carolina

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:10-cv-00973-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998748070]. Mailed to: Campbell. [11-7193]

Appeal: 11-7193

Document: 11

Date Filed: 12/20/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7193

JOSEPH J. CAMPBELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge.
(1:10-cv-00973-RMG)

Submitted:

December 15, 2011

Decided:

December 20, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph J. Campbell, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7193

Document: 11

Date Filed: 12/20/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Joseph
court’s

order

J.

Campbell

accepting

the

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation

of

the
the

district
magistrate

judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)
petition.
or

judge

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

absent

“a

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

of

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.

Slack,

We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Campbell 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

Appeal: 11-7193

before

Document: 11

the

court

Date Filed: 12/20/2011

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

DISMISSED

3