Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Mark Paul Sarno sought to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sarno did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Mark Paul Sarno sought to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sarno did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-11-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6512

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Mark Paul Sarno sought to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sarno did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record 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
    6 views2 pages

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Mark Paul Sarno sought to appeal the district court's denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging his conviction. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sarno did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied, as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record 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. 05-6512

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MARK PAUL SARNO,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
    Judge. (CR-99-58-WLO; CR-99-134-WLO; CR-99-135-WLO; CA-04-209-1)

    Submitted:

    November 17, 2005

    Decided:

    November 23, 2005

    Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Mark Paul Sarno, Appellant Pro Se.


    Paul Alexander Weinman,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Lawrence Patrick Auld, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Mark Paul Sarno seeks to appeal the district courts
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues a certificate of appealability.
    (2000).

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)

    A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).
    demonstrating
    constitutional

    that

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    28

    jurists

    debatable

    and

    would
    that

    find
    any

    that

    his

    dispositive

    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or


    wrong.

    See 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 Sarno 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