Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

113 F. App'x 561

Tunstall v. Beale

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided November 29, 2004

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2004-11-29

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on United States v. Winestock · Melka Marine, Inc. v. United States · Winestock v. United States

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion · Decided 2004-11-29

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Harvey E. Tunstall, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Tunstall has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Tunstall v. Beale, No. CA-04-688-1 (E.D. Va. filed, June 24, 2004; entered, June 25, 2004). Accordingly, we deny Tunstall’s motions for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000).

¶2 To the extent that Tunstall’s notice of appeal and appellate brief can be construed as a motion for authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition, we deny such authorization. See United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 995, 124 S.Ct. 496, 157 L.Ed.2d 395 (2003). 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.

¶3 DISMISSED

/113/fappx/561 · .json · Public domain