United States v. Eliely
This text of 276 F. App'x 270 (United States v. Eliely) 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
Shawn Eliely appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for release on recognizance or bail pending the court’s consideration of Eliely’s post-conviction motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). 1 Before a prisoner may be released on bail pending a collateral attack on his conviction, he must show substantial constitutional claims on which he has a high probability of success, and exceptional circumstances making a grant of bail necessary for the habeas remedy to be effective. See Lee v. Jabe, 989 F.2d 869, 871 (6th Cir.1993); Calley v. Callaway, 496 F.2d 701, 702 (5th Cir.1974). Eliely fails *271 to meet this standard. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. 2
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.
AFFIRMED.
. We have jurisdiction over this appeal under the collateral order doctrine. See Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-57, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949).
. We also deny Eliely's motion to expedite as moot and deny his motion for summary relief.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
276 F. App'x 270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-eliely-ca4-2008.