Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Rickards v. Kupec, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Walter Raymond Rickards, Jr., a state prisoner, sought to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rickards did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. The court conducted an independent review and determined Rickards failed to demonstrate reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his claims or any procedural findings. The appeal was therefore dismissed without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-08-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6031

    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 summarizes a court case in which Walter Raymond Rickards, Jr., a state prisoner, sought to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rickards did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. The court conducted an independent review and determined Rickards failed to demonstrate reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his claims or any procedural findings. The appeal was therefore dismissed without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    0 views2 pages

    Rickards v. Kupec, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Walter Raymond Rickards, Jr., a state prisoner, sought to appeal the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rickards did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. The court conducted an independent review and determined Rickards failed to demonstrate reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his claims or any procedural findings. The appeal was therefore dismissed without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 05-6031

    WALTER RAYMOND RICKARDS, JR.,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    ROBERT J. KUPEC; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
    STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CA04-2796-1-CCB)

    Submitted:

    July 27, 2005

    Decided:

    August 2, 2005

    Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Walter Raymond Rickards, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.


    John Joseph
    Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, Ann Norman
    Bosse, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
    Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Walter Raymond Rickards, Jr., a state prisoner, seeks to
    appeal the district courts order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.
    2254 (2000) petition.

    This order is not appealable unless a

    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28


    U.S.C. 2253(c)(1); see Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 368-69,
    374 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004).
    issue

    absent

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    of

    A prisoner

    satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists


    would

    find

    that

    constitutional

    the

    claims

    district
    is

    courts

    debatable

    and

    assessment
    that

    any

    of

    his

    dispositive

    procedural findings by the district court are also debatable or


    wrong.

    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d
    676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Rickards has not made the requisite
    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

    dismiss the appeal.


    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument, because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like