Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 102 views

    Beharry v. Galley, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Nicholas Beharry sought to appeal the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The appeals court denied Beharry's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. As such, the court dismissed Beharry's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Beharry v. Galley, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    102 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Nicholas Beharry sought to appeal the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The appeals court denied Beharry's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. As such, the court dismissed Beharry's appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-01-16 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-7505

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case in which Nicholas Beharry sought to appeal the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The appeals court denied Beharry's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. As such, the court dismissed Beharry's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    102 views2 pages

    Beharry v. Galley, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Nicholas Beharry sought to appeal the district court's dismissal of his habeas corpus petition as untimely. The appeals court denied Beharry's request for a certificate of appealability, finding that he did not make the requisite substantial showing that his constitutional rights were denied. As such, the court dismissed Beharry's appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-7505

    NICHOLAS S. BEHARRY,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    versus
    JON P. GALLEY, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
    THE STATE OF MARYLAND,
    Respondents - Appellees.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-031873-AMD-1)

    Submitted:

    December 18, 2003

    Decided:

    January 16, 2004

    Before LUTTIG, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Nicholas S. Beharry, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,


    Attorney General, Ann Norman Bosse, 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:
    Nicholas S. Beharry seeks to appeal the district courts
    order dismissing as untimely filed 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 a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional
    right.

    28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2) (2000).

    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

    Beharry

    has

    not

    made

    the

    requisite

    showing.

    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability 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

    - 2 -

    You might also like