Court Opinion

ID: 9403961
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-21 21:00:50.648956+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:10.173548
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7750      Doc: 19         Filed: 06/20/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 21-7750

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        JAMES ANTHONY BROWN,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
        Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:16-cr-00687-JFA-1; 3:20-cv-
        00831-JFA)

        Submitted: May 19, 2023                                           Decided: June 20, 2023

        Before KING, THACKER, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Aimee Zmroczek, A.J.Z. LAW FIRM, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant.
        Allessandra Elizabeth Stewart, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE
        UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-7750         Doc: 19       Filed: 06/20/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               James Anthony Brown 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 Brown 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