Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Campbell v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    0 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Dennis Lee Campbell's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court determined that Campbell did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied Campbell's request for a certificate of appealability, denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-02-25 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7582

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Dennis Lee Campbell's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court determined that Campbell did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied Campbell's request for a certificate of appealability, denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    0 views2 pages

    Campbell v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Dennis Lee Campbell's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court determined that Campbell did not make the requisite showing to warrant a certificate of appealability. Specifically, he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that the district court's procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied Campbell's request for a certificate of appealability, denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-7582

    DENNIS LEE CAMPBELL,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    GENE M. JOHNSON, Director
    Department of Corrections,

    of

    the

    Virginia
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
    Judge. (CA-03-274-2)

    Submitted: February 19, 2004

    Decided:

    February 25, 2004

    Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Dennis Lee Campbell, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant
    Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Dennis Lee Campbell seeks to appeal the district courts
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues a certificate of appealability.
    (2000).

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)

    A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).
    demonstrating
    constitutional

    that

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    28

    jurists

    debatable

    would

    and

    that

    find
    any

    that

    his

    dispositive

    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or


    wrong.

    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack

    v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,
    683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and
    conclude

    that

    Campbell

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to


    proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like