Gary Scott v. Anthony Padula

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998712011-2] Originating case number: 6:10-cv-02190-JFA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998823181]. Mailed to: Scott. [11-7394]

Appeal: 11-7394

Document: 16

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7394

GARY STEVEN SCOTT, former #273698,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
ANTHONY PADULA, Warden of Lee Correctional Institution,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
JON OZMINT,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.,
District Judge. (6:10-cv-02190-JFA)

Submitted:

March 29, 2012

Decided:

April 2, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-7394

Document: 16

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Gary Steven Scott seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.

The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a

certificate

(2006).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A)

A certificate of 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

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

When the district court denies

Slack

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

standard

find

constitutional
529

U.S.

by

that

the

claims

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 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Scott has not made the requisite showing.
deny

Scott’s

motion

dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

for

a

certificate

of

Accordingly, we

appealability

and

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are
2

adequately

presented

in

the

Appeal: 11-7394

Document: 16

materials

before

Date Filed: 04/02/2012

the

court

and

Page: 3 of 3

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

3