Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. David Scates, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    46 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from David Michael Scates. The district court had construed Scates' "Motion to Correct Criminal Judgment" as an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it. The appellate court independently reviewed the record and denied Scates a certificate of appealability, finding he had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Scates' appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-02-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-8063

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from David Michael Scates. The district court had construed Scates' "Motion to Correct Criminal Judgment" as an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it. The appellate court independently reviewed the record and denied Scates a certificate of appealability, finding he had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Scates' appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. David Scates, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from David Michael Scates. The district court had construed Scates' "Motion to Correct Criminal Judgment" as an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it. The appellate court independently reviewed the record and denied Scates a certificate of appealability, finding he had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the court dismissed Scates' 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. 12-8063

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DAVID MICHAEL SCATES,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Robert E. Payne, Senior
    District Judge. (3:98-cr-00087-REP-1; 3:12-cv-00761-REP)

    Submitted:

    February 21, 2013

    Before AGEE and


    Circuit Judge.

    DAVIS,

    Circuit

    Decided:

    Judges,

    and

    February 26, 2013

    HAMILTON,

    Senior

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    David Michael Scates, Appellant Pro Se.


    Stephen Wiley Miller,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Noelle Dalrymple, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    David
    courts

    order

    Michael

    Scates

    construing

    seeks

    his

    to

    Motion

    appeal
    to

    the

    district

    Correct

    Criminal

    Judgment as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2012)


    motion, and dismissing it on that basis.
    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    certificate of appealability.
    A

    certificate

    of

    justice

    The order is not

    or

    judge

    issues

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

    appealability

    will

    not

    issue

    absent

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


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

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district

    merits,
    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    When the district court denies

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    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

    motion

    states

    claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    debatable

    Slack, 529 U.S.

    at 484-85.
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Scates has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because
    2

    the

    facts

    and

    We

    legal

    contentions

    are

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like