Scribd
Upload
65 views2 pages

Shaw v. Waters Appeal Dismissed

This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Tilman Fernell Shaw's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court concludes that Shaw has not made the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings by the district court were debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denies Shaw's request for a certificate of appealability and dismisses the appeal.

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
65 views2 pages

Shaw v. Waters Appeal Dismissed

This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing Tilman Fernell Shaw's appeal of the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court concludes that Shaw has not made the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find his constitutional claims debatable or that any procedural rulings by the district court were debatable or wrong. As a result, the court denies Shaw's request for a certificate of appealability and dismisses the appeal.

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

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7387

TILMAN FERNELL SHAW,


Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
LLOYD L. WATERS, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (CA02-3556-RDB)

Submitted:

January 28, 2004

Decided:

February 11, 2004

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tilman Fernell Shaw, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph A. Curran, Mary Ann
Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
Tilman Fernell Shaw, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal
the district courts order denying relief on his petition filed
under 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2000).

The order is not appealable 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

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, 336

(2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee,
252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed

the record and conclude that Shaw has not made the requisite
showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal.


facts

and

materials

legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions
the

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

- 2 -

You might also like