Court Opinion

ID: 9930931
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-07 21:01:26.625971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:41.508426
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7023      Doc: 10         Filed: 02/06/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-7023

        BRIAN KEITH BEST,

                            Petitioner - Appellant,

                     v.

        DAVID GREENE, Warden,

                            Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
        Ellen Lipton Hollander, Senior District Judge. (1:23-cv-00918-ELH)

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

        Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Brian Keith Best, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew John DiMiceli, Assistant Attorney General,
        OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7023         Doc: 10       Filed: 02/06/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Brian Keith Best seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.

        § 2254 petition as untimely. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012)

        (explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute of limitations, running from

        latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). 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, 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, 565 U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v.

        McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

               We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Best 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