Travis Brown v. Warden McCall

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:13-cv-02018-DCN Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999464607]. Mailed to: Travis Brown. [14-6933]

Appeal: 14-6933

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/29/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-6933

TRAVIS R. BROWN,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN MCCALL,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(0:13-cv-02018-DCN)

Submitted:

October 22, 2014

Decided:

October 29, 2014

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Travis R. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant
Attorney
General,
Melody
Jane
Brown,
Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-6933

Doc: 5

Filed: 10/29/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Travis R. Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.

The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a

certificate

(2012).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A)

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

When the district court denies
satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

standard

find

constitutional
529

U.S.

by

that

the

claims

is

473,

484

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
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 Brown has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 14-6933

Doc: 5

contentions

Filed: 10/29/2014

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3