Court Opinion

ID: 9895149
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-04 21:00:44.298359+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:27.745120
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6276      Doc: 6         Filed: 11/03/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6276

        RICHARD LEE HEFNER, a/k/a Ricky L. Hefner,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
        PUBLIC SAFETY,

                             Respondents - Appellees.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:21-cv-00317-MR)

        Submitted: October 31, 2023                                  Decided: November 3, 2023

        Before HARRIS and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ricky L. Hefner, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6276         Doc: 6      Filed: 11/03/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ricky L. Hefner seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his 28

        U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying reconsideration. The order is not appealable unless a

        circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A).

        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 petition 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 Hefner 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

                                                      2