Court Opinion

ID: 9961107
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-17 21:00:51.988457+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:20:20.165034
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7228      Doc: 5         Filed: 04/16/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-7228

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        TYLER KADOR,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:19-cr-00351-D-1; 5:23-cv-00398-D)

        Submitted: April 11, 2024                                           Decided: April 16, 2024

        Before AGEE and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Elizabeth Anne Franklin-Best, ELIZABETH FRANKLIN-BEST, P.C., Columbia, South
        Carolina, for Appellant.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-7228         Doc: 5       Filed: 04/16/2024      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Tyler Kador seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 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 Kador 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