James Muhammad v. Correct Care Solution

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-04513-MGL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999779299]. Mailed to: Muhammad. [15-8035]

Appeal: 15-8035

Doc: 5

Filed: 03/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-8035

JAMES MUHAMMAD, a/k/a Ahmad Muhammad-Ali,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS; CHIEF MCCLEASE,
Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Aiken.
Mary G. Lewis, District Judge.
(1:15-cv-04513-MGL)

Submitted:

March 17, 2016

Decided:

March 22, 2016

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-8035

Doc: 5

Filed: 03/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
James Muhammad, a state pretrial detainee, seeks to appeal
the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the
magistrate

judge

and

denying

relief

on

his

28

U.S.C.

§ 2241

(2012) petition.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice

issues

or

judge

a

certificate

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

of

appealability.

28

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

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
Muhammad 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: 15-8035

Doc: 5

contentions

Filed: 03/22/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3