UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6393

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL T. RAND,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:10-cr-00182-RJC-DSC-1; 3:17-cv- 00687-RJC)

Submitted: February 22, 2021 Decided: March 3, 2021

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michael T. Rand, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Michael T. Rand seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues

a certificate of appealability. See

(c)(1)(B). A certificate of appealability

will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

(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,

(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,

(2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel,

(2000)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rand has not made

the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Rand’s motion to exceed the length

limitations for his informal brief, 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