Isaac J. Walker v. Warden Leroy Cartledge

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint/assign counsel [999742840-2]; denying Motion to expand certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [999751333-2] Originating case number: 4:14-cv-03749-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999829853]. Mailed to: Isaac J. Walker MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 386 Redemption Way McCormick, SC 29899-0000. [16-6075]

Appeal: 16-6075

Doc: 14

Filed: 05/23/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6075

ISAAC J. WALKER,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:14-cv-03749-RBH)

Submitted:

May 18, 2016

Decided:

May 23, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Isaac J. Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Melody Jane Brown, Assistant
Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney
General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6075

Doc: 14

Filed: 05/23/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Isaac J. Walker 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.
not

appealable

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.
A

certificate

of

justice

or

The order is

judge

issues

a

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

appealability

will

not

issue

absent

“a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

When the district court denies

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

Slack

satisfies

jurists

this

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

standard

find

constitutional
529

by

that

the

claims

is

473,

484

U.S.

(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
Walker has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
Walker’s

motions

for

appointment

certificate of appealability.

of

counsel

and

to

We deny
expand

a

We dispense with oral argument
2

Appeal: 16-6075

Doc: 14

Filed: 05/23/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

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