Juan Rodriguez v. Anthony Padula

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998804499-2], for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 0:11-cv-01297-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998948161].. [12-6392]

Appeal: 12-6392

Doc: 23

Filed: 09/28/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6392

JUAN RODRIGUEZ,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ANTHONY PADULA, Warden Lee Correctional Institution,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(0:11-cv-01297-RBH)

Submitted:

September 11, 2012

Decided:

September 28, 2012

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeremy A. Thompson, LAW OFFICE OF JEREMY A. THOMPSON, LLC,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Melody Jane Brown,
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Donald
John
Zelenka,
Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-6392

Doc: 23

Filed: 09/28/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Juan Rodriguez seeks to appeal the district court’s
order adopting in part the magistrate judge’s recommendation and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition.
The district court ruled that Rodriguez’s claim under
Roe

v.

Flores-Ortega,

528

U.S.

470

(2000),

was

procedurally

barred from federal habeas review and that “[a]ny alleged error
by PCR counsel [was] insufficient to serve as cause to excuse
[the] default as Petitioner does not have a constitutional right
to PCR counsel.”
issue

of

whether

We grant a certificate of appealability on the
the

district

court

erred

in

its

procedural

default rulings, vacate the rulings, and remand to the district
court for reconsideration in light of Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S.
Ct. 1309 (2012).

We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal
before

contentions
the

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
VACATED AND REMANDED

2