Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 8 views

    Lineham v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Stephen M. Lineham seeking to appeal the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition and motion for reconsideration. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that Lineham did not make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and materials and concluded Lineham did not make the required showing.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Lineham v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Stephen M. Lineham seeking to appeal the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition and motion for reconsideration. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that Lineham did not make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and materials and concluded Lineham did not make the required showing.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-03-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7811

    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 United States Court of Appeals case involving Stephen M. Lineham seeking to appeal the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition and motion for reconsideration. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that Lineham did not make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and materials and concluded Lineham did not make the required showing.

    Copyright:

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

    Lineham v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving Stephen M. Lineham seeking to appeal the district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition and motion for reconsideration. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that Lineham did not make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court independently reviewed the record and materials and concluded Lineham did not make the required showing.

    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. 03-7811

    STEPHEN M. LINEHAM,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department
    of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    No. 04-6026

    STEPHEN M. LINEHAM,
    Petitioner -

    Appellant,

    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department
    of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
    District Judge. (CA-03-386)

    Submitted:

    March 11, 2004

    Decided: March 18, 2004

    Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Stephen M. Lineham, Appellant Pro Se. Hazel Elizabeth Shaffer,


    Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Stephen M. Lineham seeks to appeal the district courts
    orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254
    (2000), and denying reconsideration.

    An appeal may not be taken

    from the final order in a 2254 proceeding 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.

    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 (2003);

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d
    676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).
    record

    and

    showing.

    conclude

    and

    materials

    Lineham

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

    dismiss the appeal.


    facts

    that

    We have independently reviewed the

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 3 -

    You might also like