Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 22 views

    United States v. Rolando Padron, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Rolando Padron's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that Padron did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, which is required for a certificate of appealability. The panel independently reviewed the record and concluded Padron did not meet this standard, so it denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Rolando Padron, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    22 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Rolando Padron's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that Padron did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, which is required for a certificate of appealability. The panel independently reviewed the record and concluded Padron did not meet this standard, so it denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-09-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-6852

    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    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Rolando Padron's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that Padron did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, which is required for a certificate of appealability. The panel independently reviewed the record and concluded Padron did not meet this standard, so it denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Rolando Padron, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Rolando Padron's appeal of the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The panel dismissed the appeal, finding that Padron did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims debatable or wrong, which is required for a certificate of appealability. The panel independently reviewed the record and concluded Padron did not meet this standard, so it denied the certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 12-6852

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    ROLANDO VEGA PADRON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Greenville.
    Terrence W. Boyle,
    District Judge. (4:09-cr-00092-BO-3; 4:11-cv-00208-BO)

    Submitted:

    August 31, 2012

    Decided:

    September 11, 2012

    Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Rolando Vega Padron, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Fesak, Assistant


    United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Rolando Padron 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 Padron has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly, we

    deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.


    dispense

    with

    oral

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    We

    legal

    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the


    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    DISMISSED

    You might also like