Samyeil Barber v. Warden Robert Stevenson, III

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999248053-2]; denying for certificate of appealability Originating case number: 5:12-cv-02177-JMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999329248]. Mailed to: Barber. [13-7705]

Appeal: 13-7705

Doc: 11

Filed: 04/03/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7705

SAMYEIL BERNARD BARBER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Orangeburg.
J. Michelle Childs, District
Judge. (5:12-cv-02177-JMC)

Submitted:

March 31, 2014

Decided:

April 3, 2014

Before SHEDD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Samyeil Bernard Barber, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Senior Assistant Attorney General, Brendan McDonald, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-7705

Doc: 11

Filed: 04/03/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Samyeil Bernard Barber seeks to appeal the district
court’s
judge

order
and

petition.
or

judge

accepting

denying

relief

recommendation

on

his

28

of

U.S.C.

the
§

magistrate

2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

the

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) (2012).

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);

see

Miller-El

v.

537

U.S.

322,

336-38

(2003).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Barber 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
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
2