United States v. Davis

79 F. App'x 608
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Davis. Read the opinion of the Court — 13 F. App'x 68
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided October 31, 2003·No. No. 03-7267·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charlie Lee Davis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Davis cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a certificate of appealability, and 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 habeas appellant meets 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, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039, 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 Davis has not made the requisite showing.

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

United States v. Davis, 79 F. App'x 608 (4th Cir. 2003).

79 F. App'x 608 (United States v. Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Slack v. McDaniel
529 U.S. 473 (Supreme Court, 2000)
Miller-El v. Cockrell
537 U.S. 322 (Supreme Court, 2003)
D.P. Muth J.P. Muth v. United States
1 F.3d 246 (Fourth Circuit, 1993)
Rose v. Lee
252 F.3d 676 (Fourth Circuit, 2001)