Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10 views

    United States v. Nesselrodt, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and partial denial of his motion to alter or amend judgment. The court issued no certificate of appealability, finding that Nesselrodt had not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Nesselrodt had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or the district court's procedural rulings debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    United States v. Nesselrodt, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and partial denial of his motion to alter or amend judgment. The court issued no certificate of appealability, finding that Nesselrodt had not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Nesselrodt had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or the district court's procedural rulings debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-08-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-6440

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and partial denial of his motion to alter or amend judgment. The court issued no certificate of appealability, finding that Nesselrodt had not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Nesselrodt had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or the district court's procedural rulings debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Nesselrodt, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and partial denial of his motion to alter or amend judgment. The court issued no certificate of appealability, finding that Nesselrodt had not made a substantial showing that he was denied a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Nesselrodt had not demonstrated that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or the district court's procedural rulings debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court 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. 04-6440

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    RUDOLPH ESTON NESSELRODT,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
    Judge. (CR-02-00001; CA-03-580-7)

    Submitted:

    July 20, 2005

    Decided:

    August 10, 2005

    Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt, Appellant Pro Se.


    William Frederick
    Gould, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Rudolph Eston Nesselrodt seeks to appeal the district
    courts orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion
    and denying in part his subsequent motion to alter or amend
    judgment.

    The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice

    or

    issues

    judge

    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).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Nesselrodt has not made the requisite
    showing.

    Accordingly,

    we

    deny

    Nesselrodts

    motion

    certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

    for

    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