Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Griffin v. United States, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views3 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Scott Tremayne Griffin appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reconsider its previous denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Griffin's appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right needed to obtain a certificate of appealability. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that reasonable jurists would not debate that the district court's assessment of Griffin's constitutional claims was correct or that its procedural rulings were debatable or wrong.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-08-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6490

    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 summarizes a court case in which Scott Tremayne Griffin appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reconsider its previous denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Griffin's appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right needed to obtain a certificate of appealability. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that reasonable jurists would not debate that the district court's assessment of Griffin's constitutional claims was correct or that its procedural rulings were debatable or wrong.

    Copyright:

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

    Griffin v. United States, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Scott Tremayne Griffin appealed the district court's denial of his motion to reconsider its previous denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Griffin's appeal, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right needed to obtain a certificate of appealability. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that reasonable jurists would not debate that the district court's assessment of Griffin's constitutional claims was correct or that its procedural rulings were debatable or wrong.

    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. 05-6490

    SCOTT TREMAYNE GRIFFIN,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District
    Judge. (CR-99-68)
    Submitted:

    July 27, 2005

    Decided:

    August 5, 2005

    Before KING, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Scott Tremayne Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. James Ashford Metcalfe,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Scott Tremayne Griffin seeks to appeal the district
    courts order denying his motion to reconsider a prior order
    denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    An appeal

    may not be taken from the final order in a habeas proceeding unless
    a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.
    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 370
    (4th

    Cir.2004)

    (applying

    the

    certificate

    of

    appealability

    requirement to appellate review of the denial of a Fed. R. Civ. P.


    60(b) motion).

    A certificate of appealability will not issue for

    claims addressed by a district court absent a substantial showing


    of the denial of a constitutional right.
    (2000).

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

    A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that

    reasonable jurists would find that the district courts assessment


    of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive
    procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
    wrong.

    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack

    v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676,
    683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and
    conclude

    that

    Griffin

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the


    appeal. 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.

    - 2 -

    DISMISSED

    - 3 -

    You might also like