Charles Claude Ramsey v. KIMBERLY H. RUNION, Director of the Virginia Center for Behavioral Rehabilitation

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7579
CHARLES CLAUDE RAMSEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
KIMBERLY H. RUNION, Director of the Virginia Center for
Behavioral Rehabilitation,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief
District Judge. (2:11-cv-00396-RBS-FBS)
Submitted: November 13, 2012 Decided: November 16, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Claude Ramsey, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Charles Claude Ramsey seeks to appeal the district
court’s order accepting in part and rejecting in part the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition, which the district court
treated as a petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006). 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 Ramsey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we
deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in

-- 2 of 3 --

3
forma pauperis, 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

-- 3 of 3 --