Court Opinion

ID: 9556020
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-15 21:00:28.088343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:31.171388
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6163      Doc: 12         Filed: 08/14/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-6163

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        JERRELL ANTWAN JENKINS,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (4:17-cr-00041-FL-1; 4:20-cv-00107-FL)

        Submitted: July 31, 2023                                          Decided: August 14, 2023

        Before RICHARDSON and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior
        Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jerrell Antwan Jenkins, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6163         Doc: 12      Filed: 08/14/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jerrell Antwan Jenkins 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 showing 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 show 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 Jenkins 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