Stephen Beckham v. Leroy Cartledge, No. 16-6345 (4th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-6345 STEPHEN ANDREW BECKHAM, a/k/a Stephen A. Beckham, Petitioner - Appellant, v. LEROY CARTLEDGE, McCormick Correctional Institution, Respondent - Appellee, and BRYAN STIRLING, Commissioner South Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (6:14-cv-04358-MGL) Submitted: October 14, 2016 Decided: October 26, 2016 Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Elizabeth Anne Franklin-Best, BLUME, NORRIS & FRANKLIN-BEST, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Stephen Andrew Beckham seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting, in part, the recommendation of the magistrate judge and petition. or judge denying relief his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). issue on absent “a appealability. 28 U.S.C. A certificate of appealability will not substantial constitutional right.” of showing of the denial 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). 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 Beckham has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. dispense with oral argument because 3 the facts and We 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.
