Marie Assa'ad-Faltas v. South Carolina, No. 13-1280 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1280 MARIE THERESE ASSA AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA, THE STATE OF, Respondent Appellee, and COLUMBIA, CITY OF, Respondent. No. 13-1287 MARIE THERESE ASSA AD-FALTAS, MD, MPH, Petitioner - Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA, THE STATE OF, Respondent Appellee and COLUMBIA, THE CITY OF, Respondent. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Terry L. Wooten, Chief District Judge. (1:13-cv-00036-TLW; 1:12-cv-03404-TLW) Submitted: November 19, 2013 Before WYNN and Circuit Judge. FLOYD, Decided: November 21, 2013 Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marie Therese Assa ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Marie Therese Assa adFaltas seeks to appeal the district court s orders accepting the recommendations of the magistrate judge and denying relief on her petitions seeking federal habeas relief. The appeal are issues a district not appealable certificate § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). issue court absent a orders unless of circuit justice appealability. seeks or 28 to judge U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right. a Assa ad-Faltas showing of the denial 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). of a 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 Cockrell, (2000); (2003). see Miller-El v. 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 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 Assa ad-Faltas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 3 the appeals. 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
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.
