Cedrick Clinkscales v. Robert Stevenson, III

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998867248-2]. Originating case number: 6:11-cv-01160-TMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998975315]. Mailed to: Cedrick Clinkscales. [12-6865]

Appeal: 12-6865

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/06/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6865

CEDRICK CLINKSCALES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
(6:11-cv-01160-TMC)

Submitted:

September 25, 2012

Decided:

November 6, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Cedrick Clinkscales, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 12-6865

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/06/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Cedrick
court’s
judge

order
and

judge

accepting

denying

petition.
or

Clinkscales

relief

to

appeal

recommendation

on

his

28

of

U.S.C.

the
the
§

district
magistrate

2254

(2006)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
issue

the

seeks

absent

“a

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

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

Clinkscales

has

not

made

the

requisite

showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave
to

proceed

dispense

in

with

forma

pauperis,

oral

argument

and

dismiss

because
2

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 12-6865

Doc: 10

Filed: 11/06/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3