Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Ricky Rodgers, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Ricky Maritique Rodgers appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rodgers did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. Specifically, the court found that Rodgers did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that both the dispositive procedural ruling was debatable and his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional rights denial.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-12-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7277

    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 Ricky Maritique Rodgers appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rodgers did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. Specifically, the court found that Rodgers did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that both the dispositive procedural ruling was debatable and his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional rights denial.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Ricky Rodgers, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Ricky Maritique Rodgers appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 motion. The appeals court dismissed the appeal, finding that Rodgers did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. Specifically, the court found that Rodgers did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that both the dispositive procedural ruling was debatable and his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional rights denial.

    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. 12-7277

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    RICKY MARITIQUE RODGERS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
    G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (7:09-cr-00884-GRA-1; 7:12-cv-00869-GRA)

    Submitted:

    November 7, 2012

    Decided:

    December 10, 2012

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ricky Maritique Rodgers, Appellant Pro Se. Maxwell B. Cauthen,


    III,
    Assistant
    United States
    Attorney,
    Greenville,
    South
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ricky Maritique Rodgers seeks to appeal the district
    courts order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West
    Supp.

    2012)

    motion.

    The

    order

    is

    not

    appealable

    unless

    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.


    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(B)

    (2006).

    certificate

    of

    appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of


    the denial of a constitutional right.
    (2006).

    When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    assessment

    of

    constitutional

    wrong.

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

    the

    standard
    find

    by

    that

    demonstrating

    the

    claims

    district
    is

    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 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 a debatable claim of the


    denial of a constitutional right.

    Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude


    that Rodgers has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in


    forma pauperis, 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

    You might also like