US v. Craig Scott
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:04-cr-00235-RWT-18. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Craig Scott. [15-6144]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
CRAIG ARNOLD SCOTT, a/k/a Craig Levi,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
August 24, 2015
August 27, 2015
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Craig Arnold Scott, Appellant Pro Se. Adam Kenneth Ake, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Bonnie S. Greenberg, Assistant
Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Craig Arnold Scott seeks to appeal the district court’s
unauthorized, successive motion and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P.
These orders are not appealable unless a circuit
U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012).
A certificate of appealability
will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012).
district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies
find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional
claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
When the district court denies relief on procedural
grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive
procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a
debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.
529 U.S. at 484-85.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Scott has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny
Pg: 3 of 3
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?