Spann v. Williams

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION

Touriarnold Spann, ) Civil Action No.: 8:21-cv-00892-JMC ) Petitioner, ) v. ) ) ORDER C. Williams, Warden, ) ) Respondent. ) ____________________________________) Petitioner Touriarnold Spann filed the instant action against Respondent C. Williams, Warden, seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (ECF No. 1.) On March 22, 2022, the court entered an Order and Opinion (ECF No. 53) denying Spann’s Petition. (ECF No. 53.) This matter is before the court on Spann’s Motion for Certificate of Appealability (ECF No. 56). The court observes that the law governing certificates of appealability provides that: (c)(2) A certificate of appealability may issue . . . only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. (c)(3) The certificate of appealability . . . shall indicate which specific issue or issues satisfy the showing required by paragraph (2). 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find this court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See, e.g., Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). In this matter, Petitioner Touriarnold Spann did not meet the legal standard for the issuance of a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court DENIES Spann’s Motion for a Certificate of Appealability. (ECF No. 56.) IT IS SO ORDERED.

ft

United States District Judge August 2, 2022 Columbia, South Carolina