Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Harris v. Cooper, 4th Cir. (2005)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Jimmie L. Harris of the denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Harris did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right required for a certificate of appealability. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Harris' motion for a copy of a physical examination.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-12-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6887

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Jimmie L. Harris of the denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Harris did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right required for a certificate of appealability. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Harris' motion for a copy of a physical examination.

    Copyright:

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

    Harris v. Cooper, 4th Cir. (2005)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Jimmie L. Harris of the denial of his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Harris did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right required for a certificate of appealability. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and also denied Harris' motion for a copy of a physical examination.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 05-6887

    JIMMIE L. HARRIS,
    Petitioner -Appellant,
    versus
    ROY COOPER,
    Carolina,

    The

    Attorney

    General

    of

    North
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief
    District Judge. (CA-01-142)

    Submitted:

    October 31, 2005

    Decided:

    December 12, 2005

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jimmie L. Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,


    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Jimmie Lee Harris seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254
    (2000).
    judge

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or


    issues

    certificate

    of

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (2000).

    A prisoner satisfies this

    standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that


    his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive
    procedural rulings 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, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Harris has not made the requisite showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the
    appeal.

    We also deny Harris motion for a copy of a physical

    examination.

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like