Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Brown v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    1) Robert Brown filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254 challenging his detention arising from a state court process. 2) The district court denied Brown's petition, adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. 3) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brown's appeal because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether his petition stated a valid constitutional claim or whether the district court's procedural ruling was correct, as required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. 2253(c).

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-03-17 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-6124

    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) Robert Brown filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254 challenging his detention arising from a state court process. 2) The district court denied Brown's petition, adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. 3) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brown's appeal because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether his petition stated a valid constitutional claim or whether the district court's procedural ruling was correct, as required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. 2253(c).

    Copyright:

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

    Brown v. Angelone, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Robert Brown filed a petition for habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254 challenging his detention arising from a state court process. 2) The district court denied Brown's petition, adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge. 3) The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brown's appeal because he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether his petition stated a valid constitutional claim or whether the district court's procedural ruling was correct, as required for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. 2253(c).

    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. 03-6124

    ROBERT J. BROWN,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    RONALD
    J.
    ANGELONE,
    Director,
    Department of Corrections,

    Virginia
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Jerome B. Friedman, District
    Judge. (CA-02-449)

    Submitted:

    March 6, 2003

    Decided:

    March 17, 2003

    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Robert J. Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III,


    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Robert J. Brown seeks to appeal the district courts judgment
    adopting the magistrate judges report and recommendation and
    denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000).
    An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a
    habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of
    arises out of process issued by a state court unless a circuit
    justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.

    28 U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue


    for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent a
    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.
    U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    28

    As to claims dismissed by a district

    court solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability


    will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both (1)
    that

    jurists

    of

    reason

    would

    find

    it

    debatable

    whether

    the

    petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional


    right and (2) that jurists of reason would find it debatable
    whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.
    Rose v. Lee, 252 F. 3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting Slack v.
    McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941
    (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
    Brown has not satisfied either standard. See Miller-El v. Cockrell,
    U.S.
    7662).

    , 2003 WL 431659, at *10 (U.S. Feb. 25, 2003) (No. 01Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

    dismiss the appeal.


    facts

    and

    materials

    legal
    before

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in

    the

    aid

    the

    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like