Garner v. Anthony (4th Cir. 2003)

Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (July 24, 2003)

Docket number: 03-6357


Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/garner-v-anthony-18201574
Id. vLex: VLEX-18201574

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Search in this document

Sponsored Ads:


Citations:

Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6357 KERRY GARNER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus

CALVIN ANTHONY, Warden of Lee Correctional

Institution; 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. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA-

-1330-25-BC-3)

Submitted: July 7, 2003 Decided: July 24, 2003

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kerry Garner, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Kerry Garner seeks to appeal the district court§ 2254 (2000) petition. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition 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 rightÂ’ 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.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert. denied , 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Garner 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. 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

Sponsored Ads:




Activate your free trial now

Make your order

Need help? Contact us

Try vLex for FREE for 3 days

Access legal information from United States including:

  • Constitutions
  • Forms and Contracts
  • Legal Books and Journals
  • Case Law
  • News and Business
  • Regulations
  • U.S. Code

Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.

3

days of Free Access



Other documents:
redemption | CORRECCION DE ERRATAS DEL REAL DECRETO 950/1997, de 20 de Junio, por el que se es... | decisao monocratica n 70024774093 of tribunal de justica do rs decima terceira camara civel ... | acordao n (ap)01820.2003.906.06.00.9 of tribunal regional do trabalho - 6 regiao (recife), of september 23... | LJN: AZ0806, Raad van State, 200605238/2 | Bij beschikking van de heer vrederechter van het kanton Eeklo, verleend op 13 maart 2007, werd een einde gesteld aan de opdracht van Mevr. Le... | el concierto principales solidarios, en 40 tv | decisão nº 2003.51.01.013597-1 of tribunal regional federal da 2a região, of june 14, 2008 | Dashrath Rao Kate VS. Brij Mohan Srivastava | Arrete du 13 juin 2003 portant nomination (expansion economique a l'etranger) | Arrete du 26 mai 2005 modifiant l'arrete du 16 novembre 2001 fixant les conditions ... | acuerdo n 769952700 of 7 camara extinto 1 tac of april 27 1999