Abdu-Salim Gould v. Todd Ishee
Abdu-Salim Gould v. Todd Ishee
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7020
ABDU-SALIM GOULD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
TODD E. ISHEE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:20-hc-02074-D)
Submitted: December 21, 2021 Decided: December 27, 2021
Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Abdu-Salim Gould, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Abdu-Salim Gould seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his
28 U.S.C. § 2254petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues
a certificate of appealability. See
28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 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 petition 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 Gould has not made
the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Gould’s motions for a certificate of
appealability and for leave to file an amicus curiae brief, 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
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished