Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Ong v. Sowers, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Lye Huat Ong, who sought relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in district court. The court of appeals denies Ong's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concludes that reasonable jurists would not find the district court's assessment of Ong's constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural rulings were debatable. Therefore, the court dismisses the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-08-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7736

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Lye Huat Ong, who sought relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in district court. The court of appeals denies Ong's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concludes that reasonable jurists would not find the district court's assessment of Ong's constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural rulings were debatable. Therefore, the court dismisses the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Ong v. Sowers, 4th Cir. (2007)

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Lye Huat Ong, who sought relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in district court. The court of appeals denies Ong's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and concludes that reasonable jurists would not find the district court's assessment of Ong's constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural rulings were debatable. Therefore, the court 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. 06-7736

    LYE HUAT ONG,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RODERICK R. SOWERS; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE
    STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (1:06cv-00720-JFM)

    Submitted:

    July 31, 2007

    Decided:

    August 15, 2007

    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
    Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lye Huat Ong, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, OFFICE OF THE
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Lye Huat Ong seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000) petition.

    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)

    demonstrating

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find

    that

    by
    any

    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is


    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the district court is likewise debatable.

    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 Ong 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