Opinion

Brown v. Ozmint

  • 232 F. App'x 360
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jul 12, 2007
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Williams, Wilkinson, Motz
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 28.5%

The opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6200

JERRY BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JON OZMINT, Director, South Carolina

Department of Corrections; HENRY MCMASTER,

Attorney General of the State of South

Carolina; WARDEN, MacDougall Correctional

Institution,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(3:06-cv-03013-DCN)

Submitted: June 20, 2007 Decided: July 12, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing

as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not

appealable 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 absent “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims

by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any

dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise

debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Brown 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 the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

- 2 -

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.