Scribd
Upload
17 views2 pages

United States v. Rowe, 4th Cir. (2003)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Jeffrey Rowe'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 Rowe did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating the denial of a constitutional right or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
17 views2 pages

United States v. Rowe, 4th Cir. (2003)

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Jeffrey Rowe'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 Rowe did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which requires demonstrating the denial of a constitutional right or that dispositive procedural rulings were debatable or wrong. As such, the court denied a certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal without oral argument.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6570

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JEFFREY ROWE,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior
District Judge. (CR-99-446-A, CA-02-251-A)

Submitted:

August 14, 2003

Decided:

August 21, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Rowe, Appellant Pro Se. G. David Hackney, Assistant United


States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey Rowe seeks to appeal the district courts order
denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000).
An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a 2255
proceeding 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 for claims addressed by a district
court

absent

substantial

constitutional right.

showing

of

the

denial

28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

of

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, 537 U.S. 322,

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
Rowe 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.

DISMISSED

You might also like