USCA4 Appeal: 23-6990 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/29/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6990

SPENCER UTSEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN WALLACE, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Terry L. Wooten, Senior District Judge. (8:22-cv-00349-TLW)

Submitted: July 25, 2024 Decided: July 29, 2024

Before GREGORY, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Spencer Utsey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6990 Doc: 7 Filed: 07/29/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Spencer Utsey seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Utsey’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion as an unauthorized, successive § 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, 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 Utsey 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