Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • McDougald v. Beck, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    Roy Lee McDougald appealed the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied McDougald's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As such, the Fourth Circuit dismissed McDougald's appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-6301

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Roy Lee McDougald appealed the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied McDougald's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As such, the Fourth Circuit dismissed McDougald's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    McDougald v. Beck, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Roy Lee McDougald appealed the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied McDougald's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As such, the Fourth Circuit dismissed McDougald's appeal without oral argument.

    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    UNPUBLISHED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. 07-6301

    ROY LEE MCDOUGALD,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    THEODIS
    BECK,
    Secretary,
    Department of Corrections,

    North

    Carolina
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior
    District Judge. (5:06-hc-02056-H)

    Submitted: June 21, 2007

    Decided:

    June 28, 2007

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Roy Lee McDougald, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge III,
    NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Roy Lee McDougald seeks to appeal the district courts
    order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000) petition.
    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

    that

    28

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find

    that

    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 McDougald 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