Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 50 views

    Deborah Stout v. Wendy Hobbs, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Deborah Kay Stout appealed the district court's denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Stout did not make a substantial showing that her constitutional rights were denied. As a result, the court denied Stout a certificate of appealability and dismissed her appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Deborah Stout v. Wendy Hobbs, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    50 views3 pages
    Deborah Kay Stout appealed the district court's denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Stout did not make a substantial showing that her constitutional rights were denied. As a result, the court denied Stout a certificate of appealability and dismissed her appeal without oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2012-02-27 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 11-7310

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Deborah Kay Stout appealed the district court's denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Stout did not make a substantial showing that her constitutional rights were denied. As a result, the court denied Stout a certificate of appealability and dismissed her appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    Deborah Stout v. Wendy Hobbs, 4th Cir. (2012)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Deborah Kay Stout appealed the district court's denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined that Stout did not make a substantial showing that her constitutional rights were denied. As a result, the court denied Stout a certificate of appealability and dismissed her appeal without oral argument.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 11-7310

    DEBORAH KAY STOUT,


    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WENDY HOBBS, Warden,
    Respondent - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Roanoke.
    Samuel G. Wilson, District
    Judge. (7:10-cv-00403-SGW)

    Submitted:

    February 23, 2012

    Decided:

    February 27, 2012

    Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Deborah Kay Stout, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Stallard, Assistant


    Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Deborah Kay Stout seeks to appeal the district courts
    order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. 2254 (2006) petition.
    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
    issues

    certificate

    of

    2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).
    issue

    absent

    appealability.

    28

    U.S.C.

    A certificate of appealability will not

    substantial

    constitutional right.

    See

    showing

    of

    the

    denial

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

    of

    When the

    district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies


    this

    standard

    by

    demonstrating

    that

    reasonable

    jurists

    would

    find that the district courts assessment of the constitutional


    claims is debatable or wrong.

    Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

    484

    Cockrell,

    (2000);

    (2003).

    see

    Miller-El

    v.

    537

    U.S.

    322,

    336-38

    When the district court denies relief on procedural

    grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive


    procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a
    debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
    529 U.S. at 484-85.
    and

    conclude

    that

    Slack,

    We have independently reviewed the record


    Stout

    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

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy