Court Opinion

ID: 9963609
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-25 21:00:47.100615+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:53.740919
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6072      Doc: 13         Filed: 04/24/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-6072

        DAVID EDWARD CAVALIERI,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:18-cv-00356-LMB-JFA)

        Submitted: March 26, 2024                                         Decided: April 24, 2024

        Before WYNN and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        David Edward Cavalieri, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6072      Doc: 13         Filed: 04/24/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               David Edward Cavalieri seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on

        his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 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 Cavalieri has not

        made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Cavalieri’s motion for 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