Court Opinion

ID: 9297127
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-29 21:02:21.29764+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:13:24.166588
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6396      Doc: 8        Filed: 11/28/2022     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-6396

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        DILADE MCCOY,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Richmond. David J. Novak, District Judge. (3:14-cr-00044-DJN-2; 3:22-cv-00026-DJN)

        Submitted: November 22, 2022                                Decided: November 28, 2022

        Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
        Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Dilade McCoy, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6396         Doc: 8      Filed: 11/28/2022      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Dilade McCoy seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C.

        § 2255 motion as successive and unauthorized. 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, 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 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 McCoy 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