Virgil Culbreath v. Kenneth Weadon
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999955072-2] Originating case number: 6:15-cv-00200-PMD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000051350]. Mailed to: 16-7333 Email Active Virgil Culbreath GOODMAN CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION 4556 Broad River Road Columbia, SC 29210-0000. [16-7333]
Appeal: 16-7333
Doc: 11
Filed: 03/29/2017
Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-7333
VIRGIL CULBREATH,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
KENNETH B. WEADON,
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-00200-PMD)
Submitted: February 23, 2017
Decided: March 29, 2017
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Virgil Culbreath, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General,
Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 16-7333
Doc: 11
Filed: 03/29/2017
Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Virgil Culbreath seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Respondent’s
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion, 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 of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)
(2012). 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 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 (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 Culbreath 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 presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?