Court Opinion

ID: 9374777
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-23 21:01:06.541298+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:53.098139
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7307      Doc: 9         Filed: 02/22/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-7307

        CARL EDWARD LYONS,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        SUPERINTENDENT BULLARD,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:22-hc-02159-BO)

        Submitted: February 16, 2023                                  Decided: February 22, 2023

        Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Carl Edward Lyons, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7307         Doc: 9     Filed: 02/22/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Carl Edward Lyons seeks to appeal the district court’s order and judgment

        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 that Lyons 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