Billy Tucker v. Warden, McCormick Correctional

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. A certificate of appealability is denied. Originating case number: 0:15-cv-04218-JMC. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [1000032141]. Mailed to: Billy Shane Tucker. [16-7419]

Appeal: 16-7419

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/28/2017

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7419

BILLY SHANE TUCKER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, MCCORMICK CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
LEROY CARTL,
Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge.
(0:15-cv-04218-JMC)

Submitted:

February 23, 2017

Decided:

February 28, 2017

Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Billy Shane Tucker, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, James Anthony Mabry, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Appeal: 16-7419

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/28/2017

Pg: 2 of 4

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 16-7419

Doc: 8

Filed: 02/28/2017

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Billy Shane Tucker seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
relief on Tucker’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition.
not

appealable

unless

a

circuit

certificate of appealability.

justice

or

The order is

judge

issues

a

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.”
§ 2253(c)(2) (2012).

28 U.S.C.

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
Tucker has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

3

Appeal: 16-7419

Doc: 8

adequately

Filed: 02/28/2017

presented

in

the

Pg: 4 of 4

materials

before

this

court

and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

4