John Daniel Springer v. Dennis Bush


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999608052-2], denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999603467-2], denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999580234-2] Originating case number: 0:13-cv-03549-BHH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999693641]. Mailed to: Springer. [15-6682]

Download PDF
Appeal: 15-6682 Doc: 18 Filed: 11/05/2015 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6682 JOHN DANIEL SPRINGER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. DENNIS BUSH, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (0:13-cv-03549-BHH) Submitted: October 30, 2015 Decided: November 5, 2015 Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John Daniel Springer, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 15-6682 Doc: 18 Filed: 11/05/2015 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: John Daniel Springer 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 and the court’s order denying Springer’s motion for reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). issue absent “a of appealability. U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” 28 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); (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 Springer has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 2 We dispense with oral Appeal: 15-6682 Doc: 18 Filed: 11/05/2015 Pg: 3 of 3 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 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?