Greg Gaines v. State of South Carolina, No. 09-7903 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-7903 GREG GAINES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; WARDEN, TYGER RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondents - Appellees. No. 09-8196 GREG GAINES, Petitioner - Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; WARDEN, TYGER RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondents - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (0:08-cv-00530-RBH) Submitted: July 28, 2010 Decided: September 20, 2010 Before DUNCAN and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Greg Gaines, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In appeal No. 09-7903, Greg Gaines seeks to appeal the district court s order adopting the magistrate judge s report and recommendation and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. In appeal No. 09-8196, Gaines seeks to appeal the district court s subsequent order granting reconsideration, but again adopting the magistrate judge s report and recommendation and denying relief. In appeal No. 09-7903, the district court s order was nullified by the court s subsequent order, that granted Gaines motion judge s for reconsideration report objections. and and re-evaluated recommendation Thus, this appeal is moot. in the light magistrate of Gaines See Friedman's, Inc. v. Dunlap, 290 F.3d 191, 197 (4th Cir. 2002)( When circumstances change from the time the suit is filed to the time of appeal, so that the appellate court can no longer serve the intended harmpreventing function or has no effective relief to offer, the controversy is no longer live and must be dismissed as moot. )(quoting Cnty. Motors, Inc. v. Gen. Motors Corp., 278 F.3d 40, 43 (1st Cir. 2002)). Accordingly, we deny Gaines motion for a certificate of appealability in No. 09-7903 and dismiss that appeal. 3 In appeal No. 09-8196, the order is not appealable unless a circuit appealability. certificate justice See of or 28 judge U.S.C. appealability issues a certificate of (2006). A § 2253(c)(1) 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 district debatable that court s or reasonable assessment wrong. Slack jurists would of the v. McDaniel, find that claims constitutional 529 U.S. the is 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 the 484-85. conclude that We have Gaines independently has not made reviewed the record requisite and showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability in No. 098196 and dismiss that appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 4 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 5
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
