Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Arthur Lee Hairston Sr.'s appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Hairston did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed Hairston's appeal. The court also denied Hairston's motion for copies of briefs filed in another case.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Arthur Lee Hairston Sr.'s appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Hairston did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed Hairston's appeal. The court also denied Hairston's motion for copies of briefs filed in another case.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-12-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 05-6690

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Arthur Lee Hairston Sr.'s appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Hairston did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed Hairston's appeal. The court also denied Hairston's motion for copies of briefs filed in another case.

    Copyright:

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

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

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Arthur Lee Hairston Sr.'s appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court independently reviewed the record and concluded that Hairston did not make the requisite substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right to justify issuing a certificate of appealability. Therefore, the court denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed Hairston's appeal. The court also denied Hairston's motion for copies of briefs filed in another case.

    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. 05-6690

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ARTHUR LEE HAIRSTON, SR.,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater,
    District Judge. (CR-00-24; CA-03-70-3)

    Submitted: December 17, 2005

    Decided: December 20, 2005

    Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Arthur Lee Hairston, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. David Earl Godwin,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia; Thomas
    Oliver Mucklow, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Arthur Lee Hairston, Sr., seeks to appeal the district
    courts order denying his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion.

    The

    order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a


    certificate of appealability.

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1) (2000).

    certificate of appealability will not issue absent a substantial


    showing of the denial of a constitutional right.

    2253(c)(2)

    (2000).

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    by

    demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find both that the


    district

    courts

    assessment

    of

    his

    constitutional

    claims

    is

    debatable or wrong 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

    Hairston has not made the requisite showing.

    and

    conclude

    that

    Accordingly, we deny

    a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

    We deny

    Hairstons motion for copies of briefs filed in another case.

    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.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like