Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 29 views

    Bynum Rayfield v. Willie Eagleton, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Bynum Rayfield appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rayfield failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The appeals court therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Bynum Rayfield v. Willie Eagleton, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    29 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Bynum Rayfield appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rayfield failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The appeals court therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-06-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-6393

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Bynum Rayfield appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rayfield failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The appeals court therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    29 views3 pages

    Bynum Rayfield v. Willie Eagleton, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Bynum Rayfield appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rayfield failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The appeals court therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-6393

    BYNUM RAYFIELD,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WILLIE L. EAGLETON, Warden,
    Respondent Appellee,
    and
    ALAN WILSON, South Carolina Attorney General,
    Respondent.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Anderson.
    Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
    (8:13-cv-03391-TMC)

    Submitted:

    June 18, 2015

    Decided:

    June 23, 2015

    Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Bynum Rayfield, Appellant Pro Se.


    Donald John Zelenka, Senior
    Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney
    General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Bynum Rayfield seeks to appeal the district courts order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying
    relief on 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.
    (2012).

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2)

    When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

    prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable


    jurists would find that the district courts 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
    Rayfield has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we deny

    a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma


    pauperis, 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

    You might also like