Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

67 F. App'x 213

United States v. Cabbage

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided June 19, 2003

This page is marked noindex.

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2003-06-19

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2003-06-19

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Phillip Henry Cabbage seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding 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 for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

¶2 We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cabbage has not satisfied this standard. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny Cabbage’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We grant his motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis and 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.

/67/fappx/213 · .json · Public domain