Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Stewart, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Allen Edward Stewart's appeal of a district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. To appeal such an order, a certificate of appealability must be issued, requiring a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and found Stewart did not make this requisite showing. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-02-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7840

    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 Allen Edward Stewart's appeal of a district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. To appeal such an order, a certificate of appealability must be issued, requiring a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and found Stewart did not make this requisite showing. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Stewart, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Allen Edward Stewart's appeal of a district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. To appeal such an order, a certificate of appealability must be issued, requiring a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The court independently reviewed the record and found Stewart did not make this requisite showing. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 03-7840

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ALLEN EDWARD STEWART,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District
    Judge. (CR-01-144-ALL; CA-03-1204-AM)

    Submitted: February 12, 2004

    Decided:

    February 23, 2004

    Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Allen Edward Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Morris Rudolph Parker,


    Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Allan Edward Stewart seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    Stewart cannot

    appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a


    certificate of appealability, and 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 2255

    movant meets 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,

    326 (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 Stewart 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

    materials

    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like