Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Luis Rosario v. Frank Perry, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views3 pages
    1) Luis Rosario appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. 2) A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and denied Rosario's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. 3) The appeals court therefore dismissed Rosario's appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2016-02-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-7328

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Luis Rosario appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. 2) A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and denied Rosario's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. 3) The appeals court therefore dismissed Rosario's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    Luis Rosario v. Frank Perry, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Luis Rosario appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. 2) A three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and denied Rosario's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. 3) The appeals court therefore dismissed Rosario's appeal without oral argument.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 15-7328

    LUIS ROSARIO,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    FRANK L. PERRY; CYNTHIA THORNTON,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    Louise W. Flanagan,
    District Judge. (5:14-hc-02118-FL)

    Submitted:

    January 21, 2016

    Decided:

    February 8, 2016

    Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Luis Rosario, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholaos George Vlahos, NORTH


    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Luis Rosario seeks to appeal the district courts order
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2012) petition.

    The

    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues


    a

    certificate

    (2012).

    of

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(A)

    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) (2012).
    relief

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district

    merits,
    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    When the district court denies

    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 petition states a debatable
    claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    Slack, 529 U.S.

    at 484-85.
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
    Rosario has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in


    forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal.

    We dispense with oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

    presented in the materials before this court and argument would


    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like