Cook v. Commonwealth of VA

102 F. App'x 818
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJuly 23, 2004
Docket04-6785
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 102 F. App'x 818 (Cook v. Commonwealth of VA) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cook v. Commonwealth of VA, 102 F. App'x 818 (4th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Darrell W. Cook, Jr., a Virginia prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) without prejudice for failure to comply with a previous court order. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appeal-ability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court 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 both 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, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cook has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the ap *819 peal. We also deny his pending motion for bail pending appeal, his motion for “fast and speedy trial,” and his motion to vacate judgment or grant a new trial. 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cook v. Virginia
543 U.S. 1067 (Supreme Court, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 F. App'x 818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cook-v-commonwealth-of-va-ca4-2004.