Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Demetrius Whitehead, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    10 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case involving Demetrius Darrell Whitehead seeking to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit dismisses the appeal, finding that Whitehead has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Whitehead did not meet this standard.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2016-05-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 16-6059

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case involving Demetrius Darrell Whitehead seeking to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit dismisses the appeal, finding that Whitehead has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Whitehead did not meet this standard.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Demetrius Whitehead, 4th Cir. (2016)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding a case involving Demetrius Darrell Whitehead seeking to appeal a district court's denial of relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit dismisses the appeal, finding that Whitehead has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right as required to issue a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The court independently reviewed the record and concluded Whitehead did not meet this standard.

    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. 16-6059

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DEMETRIUS DARRELL WHITEHEAD,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
    James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (5:10-cr-00213-F-1; 5:14-cv-00349-F)

    Submitted:

    May 18, 2016

    Decided:

    May 23, 2016

    Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Demetrius Darrell Whitehead, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. MayParker, Assistant United States Attorney, Denise Walker, Seth
    Morgan Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh,
    North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Demetrius Darrell Whitehead seeks to appeal the district
    courts

    order

    motion.

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

    judge

    issues

    denying

    relief

    certificate

    2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
    issue

    absent

    on

    of

    28

    U.S.C.

    2255

    appealability.

    28

    (2012)

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    his

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2012).

    of

    When the

    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies


    this

    standard

    by

    demonstrating

    that

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional


    claims is debatable or wrong.

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

    484

    Cockrell,

    (2000);

    (2003).

    see

    Miller-El

    v.

    537

    U.S.

    322,

    336-38

    When the district court denies relief on procedural

    grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive


    procedural ruling 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
    Whitehead has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    dispense

    with

    contentions

    are

    oral

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the
    the

    facts

    We

    and

    legal

    materials

    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED
    2

    You might also like