UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6341
STAFFON RAY,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN OF STEVENSON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(8:11-cv-02774-DCN)
Submitted: July 29, 2013 Decided: August 26, 2013
Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Staffon Ray, Appellant Pro Se. Brendan McDonald, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Staffon Ray seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and
denying his motion to reconsider. The orders are not appealable
unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of
appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). 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)
(2006). 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 Ray 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
2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3