Ronnie Ewings v. Terry O'Brien, No. 12-7660 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7660 RONNIE EWINGS, Petitioner - Appellant, v. TERRY O'BRIEN, Warden, USP Hazelton, Respondent Appellee, and UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:11-cv-00153-IMK-JSK) Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: December 27, 2012 Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Linn Richard Walker, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Jarod James Douglas, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Ronnie Ewings, a District of Columbia Code offender, seeks to appeal magistrate the judge s district court s recommendation to order deny adopting relief U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp. 2012) petition. not appealable unless a circuit certificate of appealability. A certificate of justice or on the his 28 The order is judge issues a 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). appealability will not issue 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 prisoner reasonable assessment wrong. When the district court denies satisfies jurists would of the v. McDaniel, Slack this standard find constitutional 529 U.S. by that the claims 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 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Ewings 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 the 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.
