Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Fearrington, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Measha Lamont Fearrington's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court issued a per curiam opinion stating that Fearrington did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to warrant a certificate of appealability. As such, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-11-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-7146

    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 dismissed Measha Lamont Fearrington's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court issued a per curiam opinion stating that Fearrington did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to warrant a certificate of appealability. As such, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Fearrington, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Measha Lamont Fearrington's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court issued a per curiam opinion stating that Fearrington did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to warrant a certificate of appealability. As such, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 04-7146

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    MEASHA LAMONT FEARRINGTON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,
    District Judge. (CR-01-344-1; CA-03-1081-1)

    Submitted:

    November 4, 2004

    Decided:

    November 10, 2004

    Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Measha Lamont Fearrington, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Francis


    Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Measha Lamont Fearrington seeks to appeal the district
    courts order accepting the magistrate judges recommendation and
    denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
    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
    constitutional

    that

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by

    reasonable

    claims

    are

    28

    jurists

    debatable

    would

    and

    that

    find
    any

    that

    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 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have independently reviewed the

    record and conclude that Fearrington 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like