Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Langley v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Lonnelle Langley's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court determined that Langley did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings by the district court were debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Langley a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-12-22 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7333

    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 Lonnelle Langley's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court determined that Langley did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings by the district court were debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Langley a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Lonnelle Langley's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court determined that Langley did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings by the district court were debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Langley a certificate of appealability and dismissed his 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 04-7333

    LONNELLE A. LANGLEY,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior
    District Judge. (CA-04-222)

    Submitted:

    December 16, 2004

    Decided:

    December 22, 2004

    Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Lonnelle A. Langley, Appellant Pro Se. Josephine Frances Whalen,


    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Lonelle Langley seeks to appeal the district courts
    order adopting a magistrate judges report and recommendation and
    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). A certificate of
    appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district
    court

    absent

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    of

    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 Langley has not made the requisite
    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

    dismiss the appeal.


    facts

    and

    materials

    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

    - 2 -

    You might also like