Tyrone Roberson v. Leroy Cartledge

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-7502

TYRONE LAMAR ROBERSON,

Petitioner – Appellant,

LEROY CARTLEDGE, Warden of McCormick Corrections
Institution of SC Dept of Corrections; ALAN WILSON,
Attorney General of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Cameron McGowan Currie, District
Judge. (2:11-cv-01486-CMC)

Submitted: February 16, 2012 Decided: February 22, 2012

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Lamar Roberson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Lamar Roberson seeks to appeal the district

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006)

petition. The order is 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 Roberson 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 the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED