Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Miller v. Walker, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    1) James Edward Miller appealed the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Miller's appeal because he did not obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding. 3) To obtain a certificate of appealability, Miller had to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable, but the court determined he did not meet this standard.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-10-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6532

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) James Edward Miller appealed the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Miller's appeal because he did not obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding. 3) To obtain a certificate of appealability, Miller had to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable, but the court determined he did not meet this standard.

    Copyright:

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

    Miller v. Walker, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) James Edward Miller appealed the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Miller's appeal because he did not obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding. 3) To obtain a certificate of appealability, Miller had to make a substantial showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable, but the court determined he did not meet this standard.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 05-6532

    JAMES EDWARD MILLER,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    DEAN R. WALKER, Superintendent,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
    Graham C. Mullen,
    Chief District Judge. (CA-01-135-5)

    Submitted:

    September 30, 2005

    Decided:

    October 25, 2005

    Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James Edward Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith,


    Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James Edward Miller seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254
    (2000).

    An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a

    habeas corpus proceeding 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)

    demonstrating
    constitutional

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    satisfies

    jurists

    debatable

    and

    would
    that

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find
    any

    that

    by
    his

    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).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Miller 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