Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3 views

    United States v. Milligan, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Omar Milligan's appeal of a district court order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as successive. The court determined that Milligan did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As a result, the court denied Milligan's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Milligan, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    3 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Omar Milligan's appeal of a district court order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as successive. The court determined that Milligan did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As a result, the court denied Milligan's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-06-05 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 06-8016

    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 Omar Milligan's appeal of a district court order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as successive. The court determined that Milligan did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As a result, the court denied Milligan's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Milligan, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Omar Milligan's appeal of a district court order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as successive. The court determined that Milligan did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, or that its procedural ruling was debatable. As a result, the court denied Milligan's request for a certificate of appealability and dismissed his appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 06-8016

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    OMAR MILLIGAN,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston.
    Patrick Michael Duffy, District
    Judge. (2:97-cr-00803; 2:06-cv-01444)

    Submitted: May 31, 2007

    Decided:

    June 5, 2007

    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Omar Milligan, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, OFFICE OF


    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Omar Milligan seeks to appeal the district courts order
    dismissing his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2000) motion as successive.

    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)

    demonstrating

    (2000).
    that

    prisoner

    reasonable

    satisfies

    jurists

    would

    this

    28 U.S.C.
    standard

    find

    that

    by
    any

    assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is


    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 Milligan 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like