UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6494
KEVIN K. JOHNSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
COLIE RUSHTON, Warden; CHARLES CONDON,
Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Cameron M. Currie, District Judge.
(CA-02-1791-3-22)
Submitted: July 28, 2003 Decided: August 12, 2003
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kevin K. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Kevin Johnson, a South Carolina prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order accepting the report and recommendation of
a magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(2000) petition. An appeal may not be taken to this court from the
final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention
complained of arises out of process issued by a state court unless
a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will
not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits
absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). As to claims dismissed by
a district court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of
appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate
both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether
the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional
right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable
whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’”
Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001) (quoting Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed
the record and conclude Johnson has not made the requisite showing.
See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003). Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28
U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We dispense with oral argument because
2
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
3