Court Opinion

ID: 9350946
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-12-28 21:00:37.127918+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:53.659631
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6646      Doc: 5        Filed: 12/27/2022     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-6646

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        EUGENE ASOMANI WILLIAMS,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
        Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (1:13-cr-00464-LMB-1; 1:22-cv-00468-
        LMB)

        Submitted: December 20, 2022                                Decided: December 27, 2022

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

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Eugene Asomani Williams, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-6646         Doc: 5      Filed: 12/27/2022      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Eugene Asomani Williams 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 Williams 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