Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Peguese v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    1) Ronald Peguese filed a 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition which was denied by the district court. He appealed the denial. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Peguese did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a §2254 petition. 3) As a result, the Fourth Circuit denied Peguese's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2008-10-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-6886

    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) Ronald Peguese filed a 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition which was denied by the district court. He appealed the denial. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Peguese did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a §2254 petition. 3) As a result, the Fourth Circuit denied Peguese's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    Peguese v. Johnson, 4th Cir. (2008)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Ronald Peguese filed a 28 U.S.C. §2254 petition which was denied by the district court. He appealed the denial. 2) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Peguese did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a §2254 petition. 3) As a result, the Fourth Circuit denied Peguese's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 08-6886

    RONALD A. PEGUESE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    GENE JOHNSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
    Walter D. Kelley, District
    Judge. (2:07-cv-00285-WDK-JEB)

    Submitted:

    October 21, 2008

    Decided:

    October 27, 2008

    Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Ronald A. Peguese, Appellant Pro Se.


    Mark R. Davis, Assistant
    Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Ronald A. Peguese seeks to appeal the district courts
    order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000) petition.

    The

    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues


    a certificate of appealability.
    A

    certificate

    of

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

    appealability

    will

    not

    issue

    absent

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    28

    U.S.C.

    standard

    2253(c)(2)

    by

    (2000).

    demonstrating

    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    this
    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).

    conclude

    We

    that

    Accordingly,

    we

    have

    Peguese
    deny

    independently
    has

    not

    Pegueses

    reviewed

    made
    motion

    appealability and dismiss the appeal.

    the
    for

    the

    record

    requisite
    a

    and

    showing.

    certificate

    of

    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

    You might also like