Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Williams v. Mitchell, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Gary Buterra Williams. The district court had denied without prejudice Williams' 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his pretrial detention. The Court of Appeals denies issuing a certificate of appealability, as Williams did not demonstrate the denial of a constitutional right. Additionally, the court notes it takes judicial notice that Williams was convicted in December 2005 upon entering a guilty plea, making his challenge to pretrial detention moot.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-05-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-7191

    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 a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Gary Buterra Williams. The district court had denied without prejudice Williams' 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his pretrial detention. The Court of Appeals denies issuing a certificate of appealability, as Williams did not demonstrate the denial of a constitutional right. Additionally, the court notes it takes judicial notice that Williams was convicted in December 2005 upon entering a guilty plea, making his challenge to pretrial detention moot.

    Copyright:

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

    Williams v. Mitchell, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is a court order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Gary Buterra Williams. The district court had denied without prejudice Williams' 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition challenging his pretrial detention. The Court of Appeals denies issuing a certificate of appealability, as Williams did not demonstrate the denial of a constitutional right. Additionally, the court notes it takes judicial notice that Williams was convicted in December 2005 upon entering a guilty plea, making his challenge to pretrial detention moot.

    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. 05-7191

    GARY BUTERRA WILLIAMS,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    MICHELLE MITCHELL, Sheriff,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior
    District Judge. (CA-05-413-3)

    Submitted: April 27, 2006

    Decided: May 3, 2006

    Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Gary Buterra Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Gary

    Buterra

    Williams

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts order denying without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000)


    petition, in which he challenged his pretrial detention.

    This

    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.

    28 U.S.C.

    2253(c)(2)

    standard

    (2000).

    demonstrating

    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    find

    by

    that

    any

    assessment of his constitutional claims by the district court is


    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the

    district

    court

    is

    likewise

    debatable.

    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 (4th Cir. 2001).
    We

    have

    independently

    reviewed

    the

    record

    and

    conclude

    that

    Williams has not made the requisite showing because his challenge
    to his pretrial detention is moot.*

    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
    *

    We take judicial notice of Williams December 2005 conviction


    upon his entry of a plea of guilty.
    - 2 -

    You might also like