Court Opinion

ID: 9831302
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:00:24.745593+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:33.681300
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7436      Doc: 17         Filed: 08/31/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                                 No. 22-7436

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        RONALD COLLINS,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
        Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:18-cr-00068-1; 5:22-cv-00161)

        Submitted: August 29, 2023                                        Decided: August 31, 2023

        Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Ronald Collins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7436      Doc: 17          Filed: 08/31/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Ronald Collins, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Collins’ 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 Collins has not made

        the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Collins’

        motions for abeyance, 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