Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Brookins, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Ronald Lee Brookins appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Court of Appeals denied Brookins' request for a certificate of appealability, finding that while his § 2255 motion was timely filed, he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker establishing Federal sentencing guidelines as advisory rather than mandatory did not apply retroactively to Brookins' case on collateral review. Therefore, the Court dismissed Brookins' appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-01-03 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-7305

    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 summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Ronald Lee Brookins appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Court of Appeals denied Brookins' request for a certificate of appealability, finding that while his § 2255 motion was timely filed, he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker establishing Federal sentencing guidelines as advisory rather than mandatory did not apply retroactively to Brookins' case on collateral review. Therefore, the Court dismissed Brookins' appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Brookins, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Ronald Lee Brookins appealed the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Court of Appeals denied Brookins' request for a certificate of appealability, finding that while his § 2255 motion was timely filed, he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Specifically, the Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker establishing Federal sentencing guidelines as advisory rather than mandatory did not apply retroactively to Brookins' case on collateral review. Therefore, the Court dismissed Brookins' appeal.

    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. 06-7305

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    RONALD LEE BROOKINS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (2:02-cr-00153-RAJ; 2:06-cv-00143-RAJ)

    Submitted:

    December 21, 2006

    Decided:

    January 3, 2007

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ronald Lee Brookins, Appellant Pro Se. Sherrie Scott Capotosto,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald Lee Brookins seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    The

    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.

    2253(c)(2)

    demonstrating

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find

    that

    by
    any

    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is


    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the district court is likewise debatable.

    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, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have

    independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brookins has


    not made the requisite showing.

    Although Brookins 2255 motion

    was timely, see Clay v. United States, 537 U.S. 522, 532 (2003), we
    nevertheless find that he has failed to make the requisite showing
    for a certificate of appealability to issue.
    Morris,

    429

    F.3d

    65,

    69-72

    (4th

    Cir.

    See United States v.

    2005),

    cert.

    denied,

    ___U.S.___, 75 U.S.L.W. 3167 (Oct. 2, 2006) (No. 05-11378) (holding


    that decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) is
    not

    retroactively

    applicable

    to

    cases

    on

    collateral

    review).

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

    - 2 -

    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

    - 3 -

    You might also like