John Turner v. Warden of Perry Correctional

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998792101-2]; denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998776974-2] Originating case number: 1:10-cv-02433-TMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998824569]. Mailed to: John Turner. [12-6171]

Appeal: 12-6171

Document: 12

Date Filed: 04/03/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6171

JOHN BRADLEY TURNER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
JON OZMINT, SCDC Director,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken.
Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
(1:10-cv-02433-TMC)

Submitted:

March 29, 2012

Decided:

April 3, 2012

Before WILKINSON, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Bradley Turner, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Alphonso
Simon,
Jr.,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-6171

Document: 12

Date Filed: 04/03/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
John
court’s

order

Bradley

Turner

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.

Slack,

529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Turner has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in
forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2

Appeal: 12-6171

Document: 12

Date Filed: 04/03/2012

Page: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3