Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Marion Anderson, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Marion Shawn Anderson of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit independently reviewed the record and determined that Anderson did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-10-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6956

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Marion Shawn Anderson of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit independently reviewed the record and determined that Anderson did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Marion Anderson, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding an appeal by Marion Shawn Anderson of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit independently reviewed the record and determined that Anderson did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As such, the Fourth Circuit denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 14-6956

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    MARION SHAWN ANDERSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
    Leonie M. Brinkema,
    District Judge.
    (1:11-cr-00231-LMB-1; 1:14-cv-00126-LMB; 1:12cv-01168-LMB)

    Submitted:

    October 20, 2014

    Decided:

    October 27, 2014

    Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Marion Shawn Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Daniel Cooke,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Elizabeth
    Nash Eriksen, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Karen
    Ledbetter Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Marion

    Shawn

    2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
    issue

    absent

    of

    U.S.C.

    district

    2255

    appealability.

    28

    (2012)

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    28

    the

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or


    certificate

    his

    appeal

    motion.

    on

    to

    order

    issues

    relief

    seeks

    courts

    judge

    denying

    Anderson

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).

    of

    When the

    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies


    this

    standard

    by

    demonstrating

    that

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional


    claims is debatable or wrong.

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

    484

    Cockrell,

    (2000);

    (2003).

    see

    Miller-El

    v.

    537

    U.S.

    322,

    336-38

    When the district court denies relief on procedural

    grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive


    procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a
    debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    Slack,

    529 U.S. at 484-85.


    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Anderson has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    We

    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    contentions

    are

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like