Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

THOMAS v. U.S.

November 17, 2005.

KIEFFER DWAYNE THOMAS, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. HOLMES, District Judge

ORDER

On October 24, 2005, the Court entered judgment denying petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to set aside, vacate, or correct sentence. On November 16, 2005, petitioner filed a notice of appeal and a motion for a certificate of appealability.

To grant a certificate of appealability, the Court must find a substantial showing of the denial of a federal constitutional right. See Tiedeman v. Benson, 122 F.3d 518, 522 (8th Cir. 1997). The petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). See also Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003). A substantial showing is a showing that issues are debatable among reasonable jurists, a court could resolve the issues differently, or the issues deserve further proceedings. Id. See also Cox v. Norris, 133 F.3d 565, 569-70 (8th Cir. 1997). The Court finds that petitioner has not made a substantial showing of denial of a federal constitutional right.

  Accordingly, the request for a certificate of appealability is denied.

  IT IS SO ORDERED.

20051117

© 1992-2005 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.