Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    This document summarizes two consolidated appeals by Ivander James Jr. seeking to appeal district court orders that denied relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and denied reconsideration. The appeals were dismissed because James failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court conducted an independent review and concluded James did not meet the standard of demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeals.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-08-31 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6027

    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 summarizes two consolidated appeals by Ivander James Jr. seeking to appeal district court orders that denied relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and denied reconsideration. The appeals were dismissed because James failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court conducted an independent review and concluded James did not meet the standard of demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeals.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes two consolidated appeals by Ivander James Jr. seeking to appeal district court orders that denied relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and denied reconsideration. The appeals were dismissed because James failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, which is required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court conducted an independent review and concluded James did not meet the standard of demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Therefore, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeals.

    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. 06-6027

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    IVANDER JAMES, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    No. 06-6582

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    IVANDER JAMES, JR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.
    C. Weston Houck, Senior District
    Judge. (4:01-cr-00965-CWH; 4:05-cv-00096-CWH)

    Submitted:

    August 9, 2006

    Decided:

    August 31, 2006

    Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ivander James, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.


    Alfred William Walker
    Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    - 2 -

    PER CURIAM:
    In these consolidated appeals, Ivander James, Jr., seeks
    to appeal the district courts orders denying relief on his 28
    U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion, and denying reconsideration.

    The

    orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues


    a certificate of appealability.

    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

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find

    that

    by
    any

    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is


    debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
    the district court is likewise debatable.

    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 James has not
    made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

    appealability and dismiss the appeals.

    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

    - 3 -

    You might also like