Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 14 views

    United States v. Justin Crenshaw, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Justin Crenshaw's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely §2255 motion challenging his conviction and denying reconsideration. The court concluded that Crenshaw did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a denial of a constitutional right. The court therefore dismissed Crenshaw's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Justin Crenshaw, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    14 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Justin Crenshaw's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely §2255 motion challenging his conviction and denying reconsideration. The court concluded that Crenshaw did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a denial of a constitutional right. The court therefore dismissed Crenshaw's appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-08-07 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 14-6696

    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 Justin Crenshaw's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely §2255 motion challenging his conviction and denying reconsideration. The court concluded that Crenshaw did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a denial of a constitutional right. The court therefore dismissed Crenshaw's appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Justin Crenshaw, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed Justin Crenshaw's appeal of the district court's orders dismissing his untimely §2255 motion challenging his conviction and denying reconsideration. The court concluded that Crenshaw did not make the requisite showing to receive a certificate of appealability, as he did not demonstrate that reasonable jurists would debate the district court's procedural ruling or that his motion stated a debatable claim of a denial of a constitutional right. The court therefore dismissed Crenshaw's appeal without oral argument.

    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. 14-6696

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    JUSTIN CRENSHAW,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Wilmington.
    Malcolm J. Howard,
    Senior District Judge. (7:09-cr-00054-H-1; 7:13-cv-00020-H)

    Submitted:

    July 23, 2015

    Decided:

    August 7, 2015

    Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Justin Crenshaw, Appellant Pro Se. Jason Michael Kellhofer,


    Assistant United States Attorney, Jennifer E. Wells, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Justin Crenshaw seeks to appeal the district courts orders
    dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2012) motion and
    denying reconsideration.

    The orders are not appealable unless a

    circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.


    28

    U.S.C.

    2253(c)(1)(B)

    (2012).

    certificate

    of

    appealability will not issue absent a substantial showing of


    the denial of a constitutional right.
    (2012).

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

    When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

    prisoner

    satisfies

    this

    jurists

    would

    reasonable

    standard
    find

    by

    that

    demonstrating

    the

    district

    that

    courts

    assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.


    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
    Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
    denies

    relief

    demonstrate

    on

    both

    procedural

    that

    the

    When the district court

    grounds,

    dispositive

    the

    prisoner

    procedural

    must

    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


    Crenshaw 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

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like