Tyrone Ravenell v. Cecelia Reynold

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. A certificate of appealability is denied. Originating case number: 6:15-cv-01743-PMD. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999973076]. Mailed to: Tyrone A. Ravenell. [16-6971]

Appeal: 16-6971

Doc: 6

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6971

TYRONE A. RAVENELL,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN CECELIA REYNOLDS,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.
Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior
District Judge. (6:15-cv-01743-PMD)

Submitted:

November 17, 2016

Before GREGORY,
Judges.

Chief

Judge,

Decided:

and

MOTZ

and

November 22, 2016

TRAXLER,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone A. Ravenell, Appellant Pro Se. Caroline M. Scrantom,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Donald John
Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-6971

Doc: 6

Filed: 11/22/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Tyrone A. Ravenell 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.

The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a

certificate

(2012).

of

appealability.

28

U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A)

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).
relief

on

the

demonstrating
district

merits,
that

court’s

debatable

or

a

prisoner

reasonable

assessment

wrong.

When the district court denies
satisfies

jurists

would

of

the

v.

McDaniel,

Slack

this

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
Ravenell has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
dispense

with

oral

argument

because

2

the

facts

and

We

legal

Appeal: 16-6971

Doc: 6

contentions

Filed: 11/22/2016

are

adequately

Pg: 3 of 3

presented

in

the

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3