Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 11 views

    United States v. Phillip Henriques, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Phillip Henriques' appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court concluded that Henriques did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Henriques a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Phillip Henriques, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    11 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Phillip Henriques' appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court concluded that Henriques did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Henriques a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-12-19 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7662

    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 Phillip Henriques' appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court concluded that Henriques did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Henriques a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    11 views3 pages

    United States v. Phillip Henriques, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Phillip Henriques' appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The court concluded that Henriques did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denied Henriques a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-7662

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    PHILLIP HENRIQUES,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
    District Judge. (3:93-cr-00089-MOC-2; 3:12-cv-00558-MOC)

    Submitted:

    December 13, 2012

    Decided:

    December 19, 2012

    Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Phillip Henriques, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Phillip Henriques seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2012)
    motion.
    judge

    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or


    issues

    certificate

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

    absent

    of

    28

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    appealability.

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).

    of

    When the

    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies


    this

    standard

    by

    demonstrating

    that

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional


    claims is debatable or wrong.

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

    484

    Cockrell,

    (2000);

    (2003).

    see

    Miller-El

    v.

    537

    U.S.

    322,

    336-38

    When the district court denies relief on procedural

    grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive


    procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion 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 Henriques 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

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like