Johnnie Smith, Jr. v. Robert Stevenson
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:12-cv-02566-DCN. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: J. Smith, Jr.. [15-7936]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
JOHNNIE SMITH, JR.,
Petitioner - Appellant,
ROBERT STEVENSON, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
David C. Norton, District Judge.
May 26, 2016
May 31, 2016
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and FLOYD, Circuit
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Johnnie Smith, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Brendan J. McDonald, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Johnnie Smith, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order
denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of a
prior order 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.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
(2012); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004).
certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial
showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).
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.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 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
Smith has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a
certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
Pg: 3 of 3
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?