Ronald Blanding v. Warden of McCormick Corr Inst

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--updating certificate of appealability status Originating case number: 8:12-cv-01179-MGL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999499290]. Mailed to: Ronald Blanding. [14-7217]

Appeal: 14-7217

Doc: 8

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7217

RONALD BLANDING,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Mary G. Lewis, District Judge.
(8:12-cv-01179-MGL)

Submitted:

December 18, 2014

Decided:

December 23, 2014

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald Blanding, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, James Anthony Mabry, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7217

Doc: 8

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Ronald Blanding 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 of appealability.
(2012).

See 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).
When the district court denies relief on the merits, a
prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

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 Blanding has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
We

dispense

with

oral

argument

2

because

the

facts

and

legal

Appeal: 14-7217

Doc: 8

contentions

Filed: 12/23/2014

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3