Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Willis Alonzo George, who sought to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and concluded that George did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the appeals court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-08-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6984

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Willis Alonzo George, who sought to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and concluded that George did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the appeals court 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
    3 views2 pages

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

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Willis Alonzo George, who sought to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The appeals court independently reviewed the record and concluded that George did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. Therefore, the appeals court 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 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-6984

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    WILLIS ALONZO GEORGE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle,
    Chief District Judge. (CR-00-25, CA-03-13-2-BO)

    Submitted:

    August 14, 2003

    Decided:

    August 22, 2003

    Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Willis Alonzo George, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Assistant


    United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Willis Alonzo George 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. 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.


    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, 1040 (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 George 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