Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Odom v. State of SC, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed James Russell Odom's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The district court had dismissed Odom's §2254 petition on the grounds that it was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations. The appeals court denied Odom's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he had failed to make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    Odom v. State of SC, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed James Russell Odom's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The district court had dismissed Odom's §2254 petition on the grounds that it was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations. The appeals court denied Odom's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he had failed to make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-03-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7753

    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 James Russell Odom's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The district court had dismissed Odom's §2254 petition on the grounds that it was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations. The appeals court denied Odom's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he had failed to make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied.

    Copyright:

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

    Odom v. State of SC, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed James Russell Odom's appeal of the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The district court had dismissed Odom's §2254 petition on the grounds that it was filed outside the one-year statute of limitations. The appeals court denied Odom's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he had failed to make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied.

    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. 04-7753

    JAMES RUSSELL ODOM,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CALVIN ANTHONY,
    Warden of Lee Correctional Institution; HENRY
    MCMASTER, Attorney General of South Carolina,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. David C. Norton, District Judge.
    (CA-04-278-18BD)

    Submitted:

    February 24, 2005

    Decided:

    March 8, 2005

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James Russell Odom, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
    Deputy Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney
    General, Samuel Creighton Waters, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
    SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    James Russell Odom seeks to appeal the district courts
    order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.
    2254 (2000).

    The order is not appealable 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
    absent a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
    right. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    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, 336-38 (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 Odom 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