Smith v. Beck
This text of 55 F. App'x 142 (Smith v. Beck) 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.
Opinion
Jimmy Cornell Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Smith has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Smith v. Beck, No. CA-01-890-5-BO (E.D.N.C. July 26, 2002). Ac *143 cordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
55 F. App'x 142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-beck-ca4-2003.