Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    Marvin Millsaps v. Wendall Hargrave, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Marvin Millsaps appealed a district court order dismissing his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 2) The appeals court will not consider an appeal of such an order unless it grants a certificate of appealability, which requires the petitioner to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right. 3) The appeals court independently reviewed the record and determined that Millsaps did not make the required showing. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Marvin Millsaps v. Wendall Hargrave, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views3 pages
    1) Marvin Millsaps appealed a district court order dismissing his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 2) The appeals court will not consider an appeal of such an order unless it grants a certificate of appealability, which requires the petitioner to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right. 3) The appeals court independently reviewed the record and determined that Millsaps did not make the required showing. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-09-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-7042

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Marvin Millsaps appealed a district court order dismissing his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 2) The appeals court will not consider an appeal of such an order unless it grants a certificate of appealability, which requires the petitioner to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right. 3) The appeals court independently reviewed the record and determined that Millsaps did not make the required showing. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Marvin Millsaps v. Wendall Hargrave, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Marvin Millsaps appealed a district court order dismissing his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 2) The appeals court will not consider an appeal of such an order unless it grants a certificate of appealability, which requires the petitioner to demonstrate denial of a constitutional right. 3) The appeals court independently reviewed the record and determined that Millsaps did not make the required showing. It therefore denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the 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. 14-7042

    MARVIN W. MILLSAPS,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WENDALL HARGRAVE, Temporary Acting Administrator, Alexander
    Correctional Institution,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
    Frank D. Whitney,
    Chief District Judge. (5:14-cv-00064-FDW)

    Submitted:

    August 28, 2014

    Decided:

    September 3, 2014

    Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Marvin W. Millsaps, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Marvin
    courts

    order

    W.

    Millsaps

    dismissing

    (2012) petition.

    as

    seeks

    to

    successive

    appeal
    his

    28

    the

    district

    U.S.C.

    2254

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit

    justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.


    U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012).

    See 28

    A certificate of appealability

    will not issue absent a substantial showing of the denial of a


    constitutional right.

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).

    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.

    Slack,

    529 U.S. at 484-85.


    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Millsaps has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    We also deny Millsaps motions for leave to depose, motion to
    bring in third-party defendants, and motion for more definite
    statement.

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and


    2

    legal
    before

    contentions
    this

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like