Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-19-06500/USCOURTS-ca4-19-06500-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Ziyad Yaghi
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-6500

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

ZIYAD YAGHI, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

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

Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:09-cr-00216-FL-8; 5:15-cv-00523-FL) 

Submitted: January 3, 2020 Decided: February 25, 2020

Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Robert Joseph Boyle, ROBERT J. BOYLE, ATTORNEY AT LAW, New York, New 

York, for Appellant. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

USCA4 Appeal: 19-6500 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/25/2020 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

Ziyad Yaghi seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting in part the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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) (2012). 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 Yaghi 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: 19-6500 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/25/2020 Pg: 2 of 2