Adarius Dennis v. Warden Cartledge

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:14-cv-04637-TMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000041839]. Mailed to: Adarius Quante Dennis MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 386 Redemption Way McCormick, SC 29899-0000. [16-6430]

Appeal: 16-6430

Doc: 13

Filed: 03/14/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6430

ADARIUS QUANTE DENNIS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN CARTLEDGE,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
(0:14-cv-04637-TMC)

Submitted:

March 10, 2017

Decided:

March 14, 2017

Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Adarius Quante Dennis, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka,
Senior
Assistant
Attorney
General,
James
Anthony
Mabry,
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6430

Doc: 13

Filed: 03/14/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Adarius Quante Dennis seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.

The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a
certificate
(2012).

of

appealability.

See

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(B)

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
prisoner

the

district

court

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

denies

relief

standard
find

by

that

on

the

merits,

demonstrating

the

district

a

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

on

both

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

must

ruling

is

debatable, and that the motion 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
Dennis has not made the requisite showing.
a

certificate

dispense

with

of

appealability

oral

argument

and

dismiss

because

2

Accordingly, we deny

the

the

appeal.

facts

and

We
legal

Appeal: 16-6430

Doc: 13

contentions

are

Filed: 03/14/2017

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3