Case: 14-10681 Date Filed: 11/15/2016 Page: 1 of 2
[PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-10681
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 5:10-cv-00489-MTT
MARION WILSON, JR.,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
WARDEN, GEORGIA DIAGNOSTIC PRISON,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Georgia
________________________
(November 15, 2016)
Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, WILLIAM PRYOR, and JORDAN, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Upon the majority vote of the judges in this Court in active service, on July
30, 2015, this Court vacated this panel’s prior opinion and granted rehearing en
banc. We concluded that when reviewing a state prisoner’s petition for a writ of
habeas corpus, federal courts need not “look through” a summary decision on the
Case: 14-10681 Date Filed: 11/15/2016 Page: 2 of 2
merits to review the reasoning of the state trial court. Wilson v. Warden, Ga.
Diagnostic Prison, 834 F.3d 1227, 1230 (11th Cir. 2016). We also held that the
summary denial of a certificate of probable cause to appeal by the Supreme Court
of Georgia was an adjudication on the merits for purposes of our review. Id. at
1235.
The en banc Court remanded to the panel all outstanding issues in this
appeal, and we ordered and received supplemental briefing from the parties. The
original panel opinion reviewed the “one-line decision of the Supreme Court of
Georgia denying Wilson’s certificate of probable cause . . . because it is the final
decision on the merits.” Wilson v. Warden, Ga. Diagnostic Prison, 774 F.3d 671,
678 (11th Cir. 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted), reh’g en banc granted, op.
vacated, No. 14-10681 (11th Cir. July 30, 2015). And the panel “[could] not say
that the decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia to deny Wilson’s petition . . .
‘was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established
Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’” Id. at 681
(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1)). Because the panel opinion reviewed the correct
state-court decision and the remaining issues have not changed, we reinstate the
original panel opinion and affirm the denial of Wilson’s petition for a writ of
habeas corpus.
AFFIRMED.
2