Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-07210/USCOURTS-ca4-19-07210-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7210

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

BRYAN KEITH NOEL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at 

Asheville. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (1:09-cr-00057-RJC-1; 1:16-cv-00406-

RJC)

Submitted: January 21, 2020 Decided: January 24, 2020

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bryan Keith Noel, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 19-7210 Doc: 5 Filed: 01/24/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Bryan Keith Noel seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to 

conduct discovery and his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion. The order is not 

appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2018). 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) (2018). When the 

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating 

that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional 

claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El 

v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 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. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Noel has not made 

the requisite 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 this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 19-7210 Doc: 5 Filed: 01/24/2020 Pg: 2 of 2