Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    McQueen v. Dunning, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes two appeals by Anthony McQueen, a federal prisoner, of a district court's orders dismissing without prejudice his habeas corpus petition and denying his motion for appointment of counsel and to place the case in abeyance pending the outcome of his criminal proceeding. The appeals were dismissed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals because McQueen did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, which is required to issue a certificate of appealability for a habeas corpus proceeding.

    Copyright:

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

    You might also like

    McQueen v. Dunning, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views3 pages
    This document summarizes two appeals by Anthony McQueen, a federal prisoner, of a district court's orders dismissing without prejudice his habeas corpus petition and denying his motion for appointment of counsel and to place the case in abeyance pending the outcome of his criminal proceeding. The appeals were dismissed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals because McQueen did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, which is required to issue a certificate of appealability for a habeas corpus proceeding.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-02-02 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7349

    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 two appeals by Anthony McQueen, a federal prisoner, of a district court's orders dismissing without prejudice his habeas corpus petition and denying his motion for appointment of counsel and to place the case in abeyance pending the outcome of his criminal proceeding. The appeals were dismissed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals because McQueen did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, which is required to issue a certificate of appealability for a habeas corpus proceeding.

    Copyright:

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

    McQueen v. Dunning, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes two appeals by Anthony McQueen, a federal prisoner, of a district court's orders dismissing without prejudice his habeas corpus petition and denying his motion for appointment of counsel and to place the case in abeyance pending the outcome of his criminal proceeding. The appeals were dismissed by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals because McQueen did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong, which is required to issue a certificate of appealability for a habeas corpus proceeding.

    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. 04-7349

    ANTHONY MCQUEEN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    J. DUNNING, Sheriff of Alexandria City
    Jail; UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS FOR THE
    EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; PAUL EBERT,
    Commonwealths Attorney of Prince William
    City,
    Respondents - Appellee.

    No. 04-7520

    ANTHONY MCQUEEN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    J. DUNNING, Sheriff of Alexandria City
    Jail; UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS FOR THE
    EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA; PAUL EBERT,
    Commonwealths Attorney of Prince William
    City,
    Respondents - Appellee.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District
    Judge. (CA-04-719-AM)

    Submitted:

    January 27, 2005

    Decided:

    February 2, 2005

    Before LUTTIG and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Anthony McQueen, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    Anthony McQueen, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the
    district courts orders dismissing without prejudice his habeas
    corpus petition and denying his motion for appointment of counsel
    and to place the case in abeyance pending the outcome in his
    criminal proceeding.

    An appeal may not be taken from the final

    order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or


    judge

    issues

    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 (2003);

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d
    676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).
    record

    and

    showing.

    conclude

    that

    We have independently reviewed the


    McQueen

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    Accordingly, we deny McQueens motions for a certificate

    of appealability and dismiss the appeals.

    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