Tyrone Beaty v. Warden Leroy Cartledge

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-6587
TYRONE BEATY,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN LEROY CARTLEDGE,
Respondent – Appellee,
and
ALAN WILSON,
Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Richard M. Gergel, District Judge.
(4:15-cv-03707-RMG)
Submitted: September 13, 2016 Decided: September 15, 2016
Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tyrone Beaty, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III,
Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Beaty seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation and
dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) 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) (2012).
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) (2012). 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.
* Because Beaty objected only to the magistrate judge’s
recommendation to dismiss his prosecutorial misconduct claim, he
has waived appellate review of the district court’s disposition
of his other claims. Massey v. Ojanit, 759 F.3d 343, 352 (4th
Cir. 2014).

-- 3 of 4 --

4
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Beaty 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
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED

-- 4 of 4 --