Steven Littlejohn v. SC Dept of Correction

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [998925831-2], updating certificate of appealability status. Originating case number: 0:11-cv-00889-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999010132].. [12-7245]

Appeal: 12-7245

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/26/2012

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7245

STEVEN W. LITTLEJOHN,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF TYGER RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
Richard M. Gergel, District
Judge. (0:11-cv-00889-RMG)

Submitted:

December 4, 2012

Decided:

December 26, 2012

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven W. Littlejohn, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy
Assistant
Attorney
General,
James
Anthony
Mabry,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Appeal: 12-7245

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/26/2012

Pg: 2 of 4

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 12-7245

Doc: 9

Filed: 12/26/2012

Pg: 3 of 4

W.

seeks

PER CURIAM:
Steven
court’s
judge

order
and

judge

accepting

denying

petition.
or

Littlejohn

relief

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

to

absent

“a

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

showing

of

the

denial

of

a

constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). 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

(2000);

(2003).

see

When

Miller-El

the

v.

district

Cockrell,

court

denies

537

U.S.

relief

322,

on

336-38

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

Littlejohn

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
3

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 12-7245

Doc: 9

contentions

Filed: 12/26/2012

are

adequately

Pg: 4 of 4

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

4