Federal Circuits, 4th Cir. (May 28, 2003)
Docket number: 03-6450
Permanent Link:
http://vlex.com/vid/colbert-v-conroy-18202453
Id. vLex: VLEX-18202453
Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

U.S. Supreme Court - Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Cir. - John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellant, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellee. John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellee, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellant., 252 F.3d 676 (4th Cir. 2001) Petitioner-Appellant, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellee. John Hardy Rose, Petitioner-Appellee, v. R. C. Lee, Warden, Central Prison, Raleigh, North Carolina, Respondent-Appellant.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUITNo. 03-6450 TYRONE COLBERT, Petitioner - Appellant, versusPATRICK CONROY, Warden; JOHN JOSEPH CURRAN,JR., Attorney General of the State ofMaryland, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA--1638-8-DKC)Submitted: May 15, 2003 Decided: May 28, 2003Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, SeniorCircuit Judge.Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Tyrone Colbert, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., AttorneyGeneral, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFMARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.See Local Rule 36(c).PER CURIAMTyrone Colbert seeks to appeal the district court§ 2254 (2000) petition. Colbert cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues a certificate of appealability, and a certificate of appealability will not issue absent a § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A habeas petitioner meets 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 , U.S. , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied ,Try vLex for FREE for 3 days
Access legal information from United States including:
Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.
3
days of Free Access