Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. McCullough, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    16 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dennis McCullough's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that McCullough did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the panel concluded McCullough had not demonstrated that the dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional violation.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2010-08-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-6353

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dennis McCullough's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that McCullough did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the panel concluded McCullough had not demonstrated that the dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional violation.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    16 views3 pages

    United States v. McCullough, 4th Cir. (2010)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dennis McCullough's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction and the denial of his Rule 59(e) motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that McCullough did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the panel concluded McCullough had not demonstrated that the dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a constitutional violation.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-6353

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DENNIS SCOTT MCCULLOUGH,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    Robert E. Payne, Senior
    District Judge. (3:06-cr-00389-REP-1; 3:08-cv-00308-REP)

    Submitted:

    July 22, 2010

    Decided:

    August 2, 2010

    Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dennis
    Scott
    McCullough,
    Appellant
    Pro
    Se.
    Angela
    Mastandrea-Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Dennis McCullough seeks to appeal the district courts
    orders denying

    relief

    on

    his

    28

    U.S.C.A.

    2255

    (West

    Supp.

    2010) motion denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion.


    orders are

    not

    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    issues a certificate of appealability.


    (2006).

    justice

    or

    The
    judge

    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.


    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).
    relief

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district
    debatable

    merits,
    that

    courts
    or

    When the district court denies

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    Slack

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    of

    the

    v.

    McDaniel,

    standard

    find

    constitutional
    529

    U.S.

    by

    that

    the

    claims

    is

    473,

    484

    (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).


    When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
    prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural
    ruling

    is

    debatable,

    and

    that

    the

    motion

    states

    debatable

    claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    Slack, 529 U.S.

    at

    the

    484-85.

    We

    have

    independently

    reviewed

    record

    and

    conclude that McCullough 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

    You might also like