Scribd
Upload
23 views2 pages

Wall v. Shearing, 4th Cir. (2003)

This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Gerald Randolph Wall. The district court had construed Wall's petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and denied relief. The Fourth Circuit finds that Wall did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismisses Wall's 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
23 views2 pages

Wall v. Shearing, 4th Cir. (2003)

This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissing an appeal from Gerald Randolph Wall. The district court had construed Wall's petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and denied relief. The Fourth Circuit finds that Wall did not make the requisite showing to obtain a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 motion. As a result, the Fourth Circuit dismisses Wall's 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UNPUBLISHED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. 03-6867

GERALD RANDOLPH WALL,


Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
B. SHEARING, Warden,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-023145-1-MJG)

Submitted:

August 28, 2003

Decided:

September 8, 2003

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gerald Randolph Wall, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Hale Levin, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:
Gerald Randolph Wall seeks to appeal the district courts
order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. 2241
but properly construed as a motion filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255
(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 a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).
demonstrating
constitutional

that

A prisoner satisfies this standard by

reasonable

claims

are

28

jurists

debatable

and

would
that

find
any

that

his

dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or


wrong.

See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

, 123 S. Ct.

1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);
Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S.
941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Wall has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny
a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis, 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

You might also like