Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Michael Jackson, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Michael Jackson's appeal of the district court's denial of his Rule 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court declined to issue because Jackson did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Jackson did not demonstrate that the district court's procedural ruling was debatable or that his motion stated a debatable constitutional claim. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-08-24 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-6259

    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 Michael Jackson's appeal of the district court's denial of his Rule 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court declined to issue because Jackson did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Jackson did not demonstrate that the district court's procedural ruling was debatable or that his motion stated a debatable constitutional claim. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views3 pages

    United States v. Michael Jackson, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Michael Jackson's appeal of the district court's denial of his Rule 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion, which the court declined to issue because Jackson did not make a substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Jackson did not demonstrate that the district court's procedural ruling was debatable or that his motion stated a debatable constitutional claim. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-6259

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    MICHAEL R. JACKSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Richmond.
    John A. Gibney, Jr.,
    District Judge. (3:93-cr-00125-JAG-1)

    Submitted:

    August 20, 2015

    Decided: August 24, 2015

    Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Michael R. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Eric Matthew Hurt,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Michael R. Jackson seeks to appeal the district courts
    order

    denying

    his

    Fed.

    R.

    Civ.

    P.

    60(b)

    motion

    for

    reconsideration of the district courts order denying relief on


    his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2012) motion.
    unless

    circuit

    appealability.

    justice

    or

    The order is not appealable

    judge

    issues

    certificate

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).

    of

    A certificate

    of appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of


    the denial of a constitutional right.
    (2012).

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

    When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    jurists

    would

    reasonable

    standard
    find

    by

    that

    demonstrating

    the

    district

    that

    courts

    assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.


    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
    Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
    denies

    relief

    demonstrate

    both

    on

    procedural

    that

    the

    When the district court

    grounds,

    dispositive

    the

    prisoner

    procedural

    ruling

    must
    is

    debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the


    denial of a constitutional right.

    Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that


    Jackson has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    grant Jacksons motion to file an amended brief.

    We

    We dispense

    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    2

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this

    court

    and

    argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like