Court Opinion

ID: 9785012
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 21:00:58.404414+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:42:28.584437
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6409      Doc: 6        Filed: 08/29/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-6409

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        JAVIER BROWN, a/k/a Juv,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:16-cr-00630-MGL-1; 3:21-cv-00568-MGL)

        Submitted: August 24, 2023                                        Decided: August 29, 2023

        Before QUATTLEBAUM and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Javier Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Winston David Holliday, Jr., Assistant United States
        Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina,
        for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6409       Doc: 6         Filed: 08/29/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Javier Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his

        28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

        issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

        prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the

        district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v.

        Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 (2017). 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.

        Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

        484 (2000)).

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

        the requisite showing. See United States v. Davis, __ F.4th __, __, No. 20-4433, 2023 WL

        4876392, at *9-13 (4th Cir. Aug. 1, 2023).          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

                                                      2