Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Koon v. South Carolina, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    1) Robert Holland Koon, a South Carolina prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Koon's appeal because an appeal may not be taken from a final order denying § 2254 relief without a certificate of appealability. 3) The court concluded that Koon did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, as required to issue a certificate of appealability, so it dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-08-26 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6957

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Robert Holland Koon, a South Carolina prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Koon's appeal because an appeal may not be taken from a final order denying § 2254 relief without a certificate of appealability. 3) The court concluded that Koon did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, as required to issue a certificate of appealability, so it dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Koon v. South Carolina, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Robert Holland Koon, a South Carolina prisoner, appealed the district court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Koon's appeal because an appeal may not be taken from a final order denying § 2254 relief without a certificate of appealability. 3) The court concluded that Koon did not make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, as required to issue a certificate of appealability, so it 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 05-6957

    ROBERT HOLLAND KOON,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    SOUTH CAROLINA; HENRY D. MCMASTER,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Anderson. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
    (CA-04-2456-8-RBH)

    Submitted:

    August 18, 2005

    Decided:

    August 26, 2005

    Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert Holland Koon, Appellant Pro Se.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Robert Holland Koon, a South Carolina prisoner, seeks to
    appeal the district courts order denying relief on his petition
    filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000).

    An appeal may not be taken

    from the final order in a 2254 proceeding unless a circuit


    justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.

    28 U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue


    for claims addressed by a district court absent a substantial
    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

    2253(c)(2)

    (2000).

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    by

    demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both 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, 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 Koon 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 the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    - 2 -

    You might also like