Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Angelo Galloway, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views3 pages
    Angelo Galloway sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, finding that Galloway did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability. Specifically, the court found that Galloway did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or that his petition stated a debatable constitutional claim. The court also denied Galloway's motions to expedite the appeal, for bond, and for in camera review of grand jury transcripts.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2014-07-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6388

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Angelo Galloway sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, finding that Galloway did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability. Specifically, the court found that Galloway did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or that his petition stated a debatable constitutional claim. The court also denied Galloway's motions to expedite the appeal, for bond, and for in camera review of grand jury transcripts.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Angelo Galloway, 4th Cir. (2014)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Angelo Galloway sought to appeal the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for post-conviction relief. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, finding that Galloway did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability. Specifically, the court found that Galloway did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims or that his petition stated a debatable constitutional claim. The court also denied Galloway's motions to expedite the appeal, for bond, and for in camera review of grand jury transcripts.

    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. 14-6388

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    ANGELO GALLOWAY, a/k/a Gelo,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
    Mark S. Davis, District
    Judge. (2:10-cr-00096-MSD-TEM-2; 2:11-cv-00462-MSD)

    Submitted:

    June 30, 2014

    Before SHEDD and


    Circuit Judge.

    FLOYD,

    Decided:

    Circuit

    Judges,

    and

    July 28, 2014

    DAVIS,

    Senior

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Angelo Galloway, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart,


    Benjamin L. Hatch, Assistant United States Attorneys, Norfolk,
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Angelo Galloway seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2012) motion.

    The

    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues


    a

    certificate

    (2012).

    of

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(B)

    A certificate of appealability will not issue absent a

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


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

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district

    merits,
    that

    courts

    debatable

    or

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    When the district court denies

    Slack

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    of

    the

    v.

    McDaniel,

    standard

    find

    constitutional
    529

    U.S.

    by

    that

    the

    claims

    is

    473,

    484

    (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).


    When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
    prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural
    ruling is debatable, and that the petition 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 Galloway has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    We deny Galloways motions to expedite, for bond, and for in
    camera review of grand jury transcripts.

    We dispense with oral

    argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately


    2

    presented in the materials before this court and argument would


    not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like