Court Opinion

ID: 9365131
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-21 21:00:29.4993+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:43.492898
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7330      Doc: 15         Filed: 01/20/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-7330

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        JERMAINE LONNIE BAINES,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:13-cr-00255-NCT-2;
        1:22-cv-00689-NCT-JLW)

        Submitted: January 17, 2023                                       Decided: January 20, 2023

        Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jermaine Lonnie Baines, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-7330         Doc: 15        Filed: 01/20/2023      Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jermaine Lonnie Baines seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the

        recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as successive Baines’ 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, ___, 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 Baines 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