Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Sayko v. Galley, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Michael Sayko's appeal of the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The district court denied the petition as untimely and procedurally defaulted. The appeals court finds that Sayko has not made a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, so it denies his request for a certificate of appealability and dismisses the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-02-01 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-7088

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Michael Sayko's appeal of the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The district court denied the petition as untimely and procedurally defaulted. The appeals court finds that Sayko has not made a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, so it denies his request for a certificate of appealability and dismisses the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Sayko v. Galley, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Michael Sayko's appeal of the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition. The district court denied the petition as untimely and procedurally defaulted. The appeals court finds that Sayko has not made a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, so it denies his request for a certificate of appealability and dismisses 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 05-7088

    MICHAEL STEVEN SAYKO,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    JON P. GALLEY; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE
    OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA04-1677-8-DKC)

    Submitted: January 26, 2006

    Decided:

    February 1, 2006

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Michael Steven Sayko, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,
    Attorney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
    GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael Steven Sayko, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal
    the district courts order denying as untimely and procedurally
    defaulted his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (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).

    certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial


    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

    2253(c)(2)

    (2000).

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    by

    demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district


    courts assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or
    wrong 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 Sayko 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like