Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    Valentine v. Reynolds, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Randy Valentine's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Valentine did not make the requisite showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability, as he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Valentine v. Reynolds, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Randy Valentine's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Valentine did not make the requisite showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability, as he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-05-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-8522

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Randy Valentine's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Valentine did not make the requisite showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability, as he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    3 views2 pages

    Valentine v. Reynolds, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Randy Valentine's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for habeas corpus relief. The court determined that Valentine did not make the requisite showing to merit the issuance of a certificate of appealability, as he failed to demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Accordingly, the court dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 08-8522

    RANDY L. VALENTINE,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    CECILIA REYNOLDS, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence.
    Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
    Judge. (4:08-cv-00979-HMH)

    Submitted:

    May 21, 2009

    Decided:

    May 27, 2009

    Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Randy L. Valentine, Appellant Pro Se.


    William Edgar Salter,
    III, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
    Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Randy
    courts
    judge

    order
    and

    judge

    Valentine

    accepting

    denying

    petition.
    or

    L.

    relief

    issues

    absent

    constitutional
    prisoner

    to

    appeal

    recommendation

    on

    his

    28

    of

    U.S.C.

    the
    the

    district
    magistrate

    2254

    (2006)

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice


    a

    certificate

    2253(c)(1) (2006).
    issue

    the

    seeks

    substantial

    right.

    jurists

    constitutional

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    satisfies

    reasonable

    of

    28

    this
    would

    claims

    by

    showing
    U.S.C.

    the

    the

    denial

    2253(c)(2)

    standard
    find

    of

    by

    that

    district

    of

    (2006).

    demonstrating

    any

    assessment

    court

    is

    a
    A

    that

    of

    the

    debatable

    or

    wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district


    court is likewise debatable.

    Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S.

    322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);
    Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).

    We have

    independently reviewed the record and conclude that Valentine


    has not made the requisite showing.
    certificate
    dispense

    of

    with

    appealability
    oral

    argument

    and

    Accordingly, we deny a

    dismiss

    because

    the

    the

    appeal.

    facts

    and

    We
    legal

    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the


    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED
    2

    You might also like