Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Beltran v. State of NC, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views2 pages
    1) Ray Beltran filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied by the district court. 2) Beltran sought to appeal the district court's denial, but an appeal requires a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Beltran did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Beltran's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-12-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7081

    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) Ray Beltran filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied by the district court. 2) Beltran sought to appeal the district court's denial, but an appeal requires a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Beltran did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Beltran's appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Beltran v. State of NC, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Ray Beltran filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied by the district court. 2) Beltran sought to appeal the district court's denial, but an appeal requires a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1). 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Beltran did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court dismissed Beltran's 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 04-7081

    RAY BELTRAN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; THEODIS BECK,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CA-03-742-1)

    Submitted:

    October 25, 2004

    Decided:

    December 20, 2004

    Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ray Beltran, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH
    CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellees.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Ray Beltran seeks to appeal the district courts order
    accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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

    circuit

    appealability.

    justice

    or

    judge

    issues

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

    certificate

    of

    A certificate of

    appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of the


    denial of a constitutional right.

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable


    jurists would find 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 Beltran has not made the
    requisite showing.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
    dismiss the appeal.
    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like