Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

90 F. App'x 59

Brazell v. Maynard

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided March 22, 2004

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2004-03-22

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently August 2007

1 federal appellate ·

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

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

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion · Decided 2004-03-22

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Ross K. Brazell seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting a magistrate judge’s recommendation and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). “A certificate of appealability may issue ... only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brazell has not made such a showing. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). Accordingly, we deny Brazell’s motion for 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.

¶2 DISMISSED

/90/fappx/59 · .json · Public domain