Sylvester Turner, Jr. v. Bryant Watson, No. 12-7858 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7858 SYLVESTER TURNER, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. BRYANT WATSON, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. M. Hannah Lauck, Magistrate Judge. (3:11-cv-00757-MHL) Submitted: February 22, 2013 Decided: March 13, 2013 Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Sylvester Turner, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Victoria Lee Johnson, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sylvester Turner, Jr., seeks to appeal the magistrate judge s order petition. * or denying relief his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice judge issues a certificate § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). issue on absent a magistrate judge 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) (2006). denies relief on the merits, of a When the a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the magistrate judge s constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. assessment of the Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the magistrate judge denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive petition procedural states a constitutional right. ruling is debatable debatable, claim of the and that denial of the a Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Turner has not made the requisite showing. * Accordingly, we The parties consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006). 2 deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, grant the motion to amend the informal brief and dismiss the appeal. facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the 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.
