James Curtis Cobbert, III v. Robert M. Stevenson, III

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion for transcript at government expense [999779238-2] Originating case number: 8:14-cv-03331-TMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999894473]. Mailed to: James Cobbert, III. [16-6281]

Appeal: 16-6281

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6281

JAMES CURTIS COBBERT, III,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III, Warden, Broad River CI,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson.
Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
(8:14-cv-03331-TMC)

Submitted:

July 21, 2016

Decided:

July 22, 2016

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Curtis Cobbert, III, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony
Mabry, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 16-6281

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
James
court’s

Curtis

order

recommendation

Cobbert,

adopting
and

III

the

seeks

to

appeal

magistrate

dismissing

his

28

the

judge’s

U.S.C.

district

report

§

2254

and

(2012)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
or

judge

issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

absent

“a

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

A certificate of appealability will not

substantial

constitutional right.”

of

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
Cobbert has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny Cobbert’s motion for
transcripts at government expense, and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because
2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 16-6281

Doc: 8

contentions

Filed: 07/22/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3