Jackie Williams v. George Hagan, No. 10-6694 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-6694 JACKIE WILLIAMS, a/k/a Jackie L. Williams, Petitioner - Appellant, v. GEORGE T. Institution, HAGAN, Warden of Allendale Correctional Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:08-cv-03350-GRA) Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 9, 2010 Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jackie Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jackie Williams seeks to appeal the district court s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. appealable § 2254 unless (2006) circuit a petition. justice certificate of appealability. Reid v. Angelone, A certificate of 369 The or order judge is issues not a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); F.3d 363, appealability 369 will (4th not Cir. issue 2004). absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). relief on the demonstrating district merits, that court s debatable or a When the district court denies prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. Slack satisfies jurists this would of the v. McDaniel, standard find that U.S. the claims constitutional 529 by 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 We that have independently Williams has not reviewed made the record requisite and showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 2 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
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.
