Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. McNeal, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of United States v. Tyref McNeal. The court dismissed McNeal's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court did not issue because McNeal did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court also found that while McNeal could assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea despite waiving collateral review, he did not qualify for a certificate of appealability on that claim.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7863

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of United States v. Tyref McNeal. The court dismissed McNeal's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court did not issue because McNeal did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court also found that while McNeal could assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea despite waiving collateral review, he did not qualify for a certificate of appealability on that claim.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. McNeal, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case of United States v. Tyref McNeal. The court dismissed McNeal's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court did not issue because McNeal did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court also found that while McNeal could assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea despite waiving collateral review, he did not qualify for a certificate of appealability on that claim.

    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. 06-7863

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    TYREF MCNEAL, a/k/a Beans,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
    District Judge. (1:05-cr-00050-IMK; 1:06-cv-00139-IMK)

    Submitted:

    March 21, 2007

    Decided:

    June 6, 2007

    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Tyref McNeal, Appellant Pro Se. Zelda Elizabeth Wesley, OFFICE OF


    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Tyref McNeal seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.
    not

    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    certificate of appealability.

    justice

    or

    The order is

    judge

    issues

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2000).

    certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial


    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

    2253(c)(2)

    demonstrating

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find

    that

    by
    any

    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is


    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the district court is likewise debatable.

    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, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have

    independently reviewed the record and conclude that McNeal 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

    Though we conclude McNeal may assert his claim of ineffective


    assistance of counsel in relation to his guilty plea despite his
    waiver of collateral review, we find he fails to qualify for a
    certificate of appealability as to that claim.
    - 2 -

    You might also like