Graham Harry Schiff v. Warden; Attorney General for the State of Maryland

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7559
GRAHAM HARRY SCHIFF,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Paula Xinis, District Judge. (8:20-cv-01144-PX)
Submitted: September 30, 2021 Decided: October 13, 2021
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Graham Harry Schiff, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Graham Henry Schiff seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as
untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9
(2012) (explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute of limitations,
running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)).
The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of
appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue
absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(2). When, as here, 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. Gonzalez, 565
U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Schiff has not made
the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Schiff’s motion for a stay of the state court
judgment, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal. 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

-- 2 of 2 --