TYLER v. WARDEN PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION (2020)
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Randall S. TYLER, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee.
Decided: June 09, 2020
Before MOTZ, AGEE, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Jasmine Grace Chalashtori, Adam H. Farra, GILBERT, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Melody Jane Brown, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Randall S. Tyler seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Tyler's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2018) petition, and a subsequent order denying Tyler's Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2018). 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) (2018). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74, 197 L.Ed.2d 1 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41, 132 S.Ct. 641, 181 L.Ed.2d 619 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Tyler has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Tyler's motion to file a reply, we deny Tyler's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss this appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.