Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Jones, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Anthony Jones' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In less than 3 sentences, the panel of judges dismissed Jones' appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-09-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6072

    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    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Anthony Jones' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In less than 3 sentences, the panel of judges dismissed Jones' appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Jones, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Anthony Jones' appeal of the district court's denial of his motion seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In less than 3 sentences, the panel of judges dismissed Jones' appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal 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. 03-6072

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ANTHONY AYENI JONES,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    William M. Nickerson, Senior District
    Judge. (CR-96-458-WMN, CA-01-1486-WMN, CR-97-355-WMN, CA-01-1485WMN)

    Submitted:

    August 28, 2003

    Decided:

    September 4, 2003

    Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Anthony Ayeni Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Jamie M. Bennett, Assistant


    United States Attorney, Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant United
    States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony Jones seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues a certificate of appealability.
    (2000).

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

    A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).
    demonstrating
    constitutional

    that

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    28

    jurists

    debatable

    and

    would
    that

    find
    any

    that

    his

    dispositive

    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or


    wrong.

    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

    , 123 S. Ct.

    1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);
    Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S.
    941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Jones 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

    You might also like