Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Aubin, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Patrick Jean Aubin's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Aubin did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court also denied Aubin's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-01-18 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6427

    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 denied Patrick Jean Aubin's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Aubin did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court also denied Aubin's motion for appointment of counsel.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Aubin, 4th Cir. (2006)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Patrick Jean Aubin's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Aubin did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. The court also denied Aubin's motion for appointment of counsel.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 05-6427

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    PATRICK JEAN AUBIN,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CR-01-49; CA-04-705-1)

    Submitted:

    December 21, 2005

    Decided:

    January 18, 2006

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Patrick Jean Aubin, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Hale Levin, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Patrick Jean Aubin seeks to appeal the district courts
    order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.
    not

    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    certificate of appealability.

    justice

    or

    The order is

    judge

    issues

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2000).

    certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial


    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

    2253(c)(2)

    demonstrating
    constitutional

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    satisfies

    jurists

    debatable

    and

    would
    that

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find
    any

    that

    by
    his

    dispositive

    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or


    wrong.

    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d
    676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Aubin has not made the requisite showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
    dismiss the appeal. We also deny Aubins motion for appointment of
    counsel.

    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