Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    1) Earl Edward Webb sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. 2) A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Webb 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 the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2006-11-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-6926

    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) Earl Edward Webb sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. 2) A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Webb 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 the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Earl Edward Webb sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. 2) A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. 3) The court independently reviewed the record and determined that Webb 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 the 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    UNPUBLISHED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. 06-6926

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    EARL EDWARD WEBB,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (5:98-cr-00037; 5:00-cv-00061-F)

    Submitted: October 31, 2006

    Decided:

    November 6, 2006

    Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Earl Edward Webb, Appellant Pro Se. Steve R. Matheny, OFFICE OF


    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Earl Edward Webb seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    The

    order is 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 Webb has not
    made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

    appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    the record on appeal is denied.

    Webbs motion to supplement

    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