U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2022

United States v. Kenneth Brown

United States v. Kenneth Brown
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 26, 2022

United States v. Kenneth Brown

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6160 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/26/2022 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6160

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNETH LEE BROWN, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (7:04-cr-00027-HMH-1; 7:22- cv-00011-HMH)

Submitted: July 21, 2022 Decided: July 26, 2022

Before MOTZ, HARRIS, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Justin William Holloway, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6160 Doc: 11 Filed: 07/26/2022 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Kenneth Lee Brown 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 Brown 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

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.