Court Opinion

ID: 9930924
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-07 21:01:18.57269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:47.035940
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6886      Doc: 9         Filed: 02/06/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                              UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6886

        ISIAH JAMES, JR.,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        BRYAN P. STIRLING,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken.
        Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (1:17-cv-01837-TLW)

        Submitted: January 30, 2024                                       Decided: February 6, 2024

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Isiah James, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6886         Doc: 9       Filed: 02/06/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Isiah James, Jr., previously a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order

        denying relief on his motion to reopen his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition. The order is not

        appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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 James 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