TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Anderson v. Sowders

Tyrell Davron ANDERSON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Roderick SOWDERS, Warden; Kenneth Morning, Warden; Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees

Anderson v. Sowders, 100 F. App'x 944 (4th Cir. 2004)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 21, 2004
Docket
No. 04-6652
Judges
Williams, Traxler, Hamilton
Citations
100 F. App'x 944
Status
Unpublished
Disposition
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Tyrell Davron Anderson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 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 absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong.

See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 , 123 S.Ct. 1029 , 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 , 120 S.Ct. 1595 , 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000);

Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Anderson has not made the requisite *945 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

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2004: 120042026peak 2004 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Anderson v. Sowders, Warden543 U.S. 903 (2004)

Most recent

  1. Anderson v. Sowders, Warden543 U.S. 903 (2004)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) 41,948
Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003) 27,477
Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676 (4th Cir. 2001) 7,442

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list