Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 1012974
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Whitaker v. Demps
No. 1012974 · Decided March 29, 2004
No. 1012974·Fourth Circuit · 2004·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided
March 29, 2004
Citation
No. 1012974
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7176
JEFFREY D. WHITAKER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
JAMES EDGAR DEMPS, Attorney & Counsel at law,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District
Judge. (CA-03-819)
Submitted: February 25, 2004 Decided: March 29, 2004
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jeffrey D. Whitaker, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jeffrey D. Whitaker seeks to appeal the district court’s
order dismissing without prejudice his petition filed under 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), for failure to exhaust state remedies. An
appeal may not be taken 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). When, as here, a
district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural
grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the
petitioner can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would
find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the
denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason
would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in
its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee, 252 F. 3d 676, 684 (4th
Cir.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert.
denied, 122 S.Ct. 318 (2001). We have reviewed the record and
conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Whitaker
has not made the requisite showing. See Whitaker v. Demps, No. CA-
03-819 (E.D. Va. filed July 7, 2003 & entered July 9, 2003).
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
Plain English Summary
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
Key Points
01UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
02WHITAKER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES EDGAR DEMPS, Attorney & Counsel at law, Respondent - Appellee.
03(CA-03-819) Submitted: February 25, 2004 Decided: March 29, 2004 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
04Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Frequently Asked Questions
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Whitaker v. Demps in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on March 29, 2004.
Use the citation No. 1012974 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.