Stephen Corley v. Warden Robert Stevenson

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:15-cv-00375-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999919710]. Mailed to: Stephen Corley. [16-6471]

Appeal: 16-6471

Doc: 11

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6471

STEPHEN CORLEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN ROBERT STEVENSON,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(0:15-cv-00375-RBH)

Submitted:

August 25, 2016

Decided:

August 30, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen Corley, Appellant Pro Se.
Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6471

Doc: 11

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Stephen Corley 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

U.S.

by

that

the

claims

is

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
Corley has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,

and

dismiss

the

appeal.

We

dispense

with

oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
2

Appeal: 16-6471

Doc: 11

Filed: 08/30/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

3