Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Stewart, 03-6616 (2003)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-6616 Visitors: 241
Filed: Jun. 20, 2003
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-6616 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus GLENN ALBERT STEWART, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., District Judge. (CR-97-53, CA-00-138-5) Submitted: June 12, 2003 Decided: June 20, 2003 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Glenn
More
                             UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 03-6616



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                               Plaintiff - Appellee,

          versus


GLENN ALBERT STEWART, JR.,

                                            Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,
District Judge. (CR-97-53, CA-00-138-5)


Submitted:   June 12, 2003                 Decided:   June 20, 2003


Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Glenn Albert Stewart, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Grimes Johnston,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

     Glenn A. Stewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order

adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

The order is not appealable 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 absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”               28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).     A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating    that   reasonable       jurists    would   find    that   his

constitutional   claims   are   debatable     and    that   any    dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong.    See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 
123 S. Ct. 1029
, 1040 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 
529 U.S. 473
, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 
252 F.3d 676
, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 
534 U.S. 941
 (2001).               We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stewart has not

made the requisite showing.     Accordingly, we deny Stewart’s motion

for 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.




                                                                     DISMISSED


                                     2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer