Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Boyd v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Lonnie Boyd's appeal of the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. The court determined that Boyd was not entitled to a certificate of appealability because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Boyd did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Boyd's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-07-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 09-7945

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Lonnie Boyd's appeal of the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. The court determined that Boyd was not entitled to a certificate of appealability because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Boyd did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Boyd's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views3 pages

    Boyd v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Lonnie Boyd's appeal of the district court's dismissal without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition. The court determined that Boyd was not entitled to a certificate of appealability because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Boyd did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Boyd's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 09-7945

    LONNIE BOYD,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE M. JOHNSON,
    Corrections,

    Director

    of

    the

    Virginia

    Department

    of

    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
    Judge. (2:09-cv-00337-JBF-TEM)

    Submitted:

    July 22, 2010

    Decided:

    July 29, 2010

    Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lonnie Boyd, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Lonnie Boyd seeks to appeal the district courts order
    dismissing

    without

    petition.

    prejudice

    his

    28

    U.S.C.

    (2006)

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

    or judge issues a certificate of appealability.


    2253(c)(1) (2006).
    issue

    2254

    absent

    See 28 U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).

    of

    When the

    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies


    this

    standard

    by

    demonstrating

    that

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find that the district courts 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.
    529 U.S. at 484-85.
    and

    conclude

    that

    Slack,

    We have independently reviewed the record


    Boyd

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    showing.

    Accordingly, we 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

    the

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional

    process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like