David Molina v. Cecelia Reynold

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999837403-2] Originating case number: 2:15-cv-01263-RBH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999902433].. [16-6532]

Appeal: 16-6532

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6532

DAVID ANDRES ORTIZ MOLINA,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
CECELIA REYNOLDS, Warden, Lee Correctional Institution,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
R. Bryan Harwell, District
Judge. (2:15-cv-01263-RBH)

Submitted:

July 28, 2016

Before MOTZ and
Circuit Judge.

HARRIS,

Decided:

Circuit

Judges,

and

August 2, 2016

DAVIS,

Senior

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeremy A. Thompson, LAW OFFICE OF JEREMY A. THOMPSON, LLC,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
William Edgar Salter,
III, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 16-6532

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
David
court’s
judge

order
and

petition.
or

Andres

judge

Ortiz

accepting

denying

the

relief

seeks

to

appeal

recommendation
on

his

28

of

U.S.C.

the

the

district

magistrate

§ 2254

(2012)

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice
issues

a

certificate

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).
issue

Molina

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
Molina 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: 16-6532

Doc: 14

Filed: 08/02/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

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

DISMISSED

3