Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 211 views

    United States v. Adewale Aladekoba, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed in part and dismissed in part Adewale Johnson Aladekoba's appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction. The appeals court affirmed the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) for the reasons stated by the district court. It dismissed the portion of Aladekoba's motion that was intended as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, finding it was successive. The appeals court also denied a certificate of appealability, having determined that Aladekoba did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Adewale Aladekoba, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    211 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed in part and dismissed in part Adewale Johnson Aladekoba's appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction. The appeals court affirmed the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) for the reasons stated by the district court. It dismissed the portion of Aladekoba's motion that was intended as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, finding it was successive. The appeals court also denied a certificate of appealability, having determined that Aladekoba did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-11-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-7075

    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 affirmed in part and dismissed in part Adewale Johnson Aladekoba's appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction. The appeals court affirmed the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) for the reasons stated by the district court. It dismissed the portion of Aladekoba's motion that was intended as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, finding it was successive. The appeals court also denied a certificate of appealability, having determined that Aladekoba did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Adewale Aladekoba, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed in part and dismissed in part Adewale Johnson Aladekoba's appeal of the district court's denial of his motion for a sentence reduction. The appeals court affirmed the denial of relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(B) for the reasons stated by the district court. It dismissed the portion of Aladekoba's motion that was intended as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, finding it was successive. The appeals court also denied a certificate of appealability, having determined that Aladekoba did not make the requisite showing that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of his

    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. 12-7075

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    ADEWALE JOHNSON ALADEKOBA, a/k/a Jay Johnson, a/k/a Orlando
    Percival McGregory, a/k/a Wally,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore.
    William M. Nickerson, Senior District
    Judge. (1:93-cr-00018-WMN-3; 1:12-cv-00924-WMN)

    Submitted:

    November 2, 2012

    Decided:

    November 6, 2012

    Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam


    opinion.

    Adewale Johnson Aladekoba, Appellant Pro Se. Roann Nichols,


    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Adewale Johnson Aladekoba appeals the district courts
    order denying his 18 U.S.C.A. 3582(c)(1)(B) (West Supp. 2011)
    motion for sentence reduction to the extent otherwise permitted
    by 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 (West Supp. 2012).

    We have reviewed the

    record and find no reversible error as to the denial of relief


    under 18 U.S.C.A. 3582(c)(1)(B).

    Accordingly, we affirm that

    portion of the order for the reasons stated by the district


    court.

    United States v. Aladekoba, Nos. 1:93-cr-00018-WMN-3;

    1:12-cv-00924-WMN (D. Md. June 5, 2012).


    The district court also considered Aladekobas motion
    to the extent it was intended as a 28 U.S.C.A. 2255 motion,
    and dismissed it as successive.
    not

    appealable

    unless

    circuit

    certificate of appealability.
    A

    certificate

    of

    This portion of the order is


    justice

    or

    judge

    issues

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006).

    appealability

    will

    not

    issue

    absent

    substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.


    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2006).
    relief

    on

    the

    demonstrating
    district
    debatable

    merits,
    that

    courts
    or

    prisoner

    reasonable

    assessment

    wrong.

    When the district court denies

    Slack

    satisfies

    jurists

    this

    would

    of

    the

    v.

    McDaniel,

    standard

    find

    constitutional
    529

    U.S.

    by

    that

    the

    claims

    is

    473,

    484

    (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).


    When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the
    2

    prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural


    ruling

    is

    debatable,

    and

    that

    the

    motion

    states

    claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

    debatable

    Slack, 529 U.S.

    at 484-85.
    We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
    that Aladekoba has not made the requisite showing.

    Accordingly,

    we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the portion


    of the appeal related to 2255 relief.
    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    AFFIRMED IN PART;
    DISMISSED IN PART

    You might also like