Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Moody, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Christopher Lee Moody's appeal of a district court order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The court determined that Moody failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. As a result, the court denied Moody's request to proceed in forma pauperis, denied a certificate of appealability, and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-12-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6756

    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 Christopher Lee Moody's appeal of a district court order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The court determined that Moody failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. As a result, the court denied Moody's request to proceed in forma pauperis, denied a certificate of appealability, and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Christopher Lee Moody's appeal of a district court order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. The court determined that Moody failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, as required to issue a certificate of appealability. As a result, the court denied Moody's request to proceed in forma pauperis, denied a certificate of appealability, and dismissed the appeal.

    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. 05-6756

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHRISTOPHER LEE MOODY,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District


    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    District Judge. (CR-01-452; CA-03-1083)

    Submitted:

    November 22, 2005

    Court for the Middle


    James A. Beaty, Jr.,

    Decided:

    December 2, 2005

    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Christopher Lee Moody, Appellant Pro Se.


    Lisa Blue Boggs,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Christopher

    Lee

    Moody

    seeks

    to

    appeal

    the

    district

    courts order adopting the recommendation of a magistrate judge and


    denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).

    An appeal

    may not be taken from the final order in a 2255 proceeding 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

    constitutional right.

    substantial

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    of

    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

    (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 Moody has not made the requisite
    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis,

    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 do not address Moodys illegal vehicle stop claim as this


    claim is raised for the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United
    States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that issues raised
    for the first time on appeal are generally waived absent
    exceptional circumstances).
    - 2 -

    You might also like