Jose Antonio Anzaldo v. Cecelia Reynold
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:14-cv-03175-RMG Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Jose Antonio Anzaldo. [15-7489]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
JOSE ANTONIO ANZALDO, a/k/a Jose A. Anzaldo,
Petitioner - Appellant,
CECELIA REYNOLDS, Warden Kershaw Correctional Institution,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Richard Mark Gergel, District
February 23, 2016
February 25, 2016
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jose Antonio Anzaldo, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Jose Antonio Anzaldo 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.
order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
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
(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.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Anzaldo has not made the requisite showing.
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Pg: 3 of 3
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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?