US v. Robert Benton, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:97-cr-00866-CMC-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Robert Benton Jr. FCI MARIANNA FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 7007 Marianna, FL 32447-7007. [18-6288]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
ROBERT BENTON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. (4:97-cr-00866-CMC-1)
Submitted: May 24, 2018
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Benton, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Decided: May 30, 2018
Pg: 2 of 2
Robert Benton, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his motion
to correct a clerical error as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and dismissing the motion
as successive and unauthorized. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 motion
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 Benton 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
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
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?