Court Opinion

ID: 9908493
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-08 21:00:34.604955+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:12.620285
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6873      Doc: 9         Filed: 12/07/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-6873

        ROMAN DALACIO PERDONO,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:23-hc-02007-FL)

        Submitted: November 13, 2023                                  Decided: December 7, 2023

        Before GREGORY and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Roman Dalacio Perdono, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6873         Doc: 9      Filed: 12/07/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Roman Dalacio Perdono seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28

        U.S.C. § 2254 petition as an unauthorized, successive § 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, as here,

        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 Perdono 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