USCA4 Appeal: 23-6235 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6235

FREDERICK LAMONT HAZEL,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

CHADWICK DOTSON,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David J. Novak, District Judge. (3:21-cv-00706-DJN-MRC)

Submitted: December 19, 2023 Decided: December 27, 2023

Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frederick Lamont Hazel, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-6235 Doc: 10 Filed: 12/27/2023 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Frederick Lamont Hazel seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on

his

petition. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. See

(c)(1)(A). 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 petition 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 Hazel 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