Court Opinion

ID: 6112476
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-25 20:01:12.213634+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:34.066327
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                      No. 21-7320

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                    Plaintiff - Appellee,

             v.

ANTHONY MICHAEL LAPORTE,

                    Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, Senior District Judge. (4:19-cr-00008-RBS-LRL-
1; 4:20-cv-00154-RBS)

Submitted: January 20, 2022                                       Decided: January 25, 2022

Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Michael Laporte, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

       Anthony Michael LaPorte 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, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 (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 LaPorte 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