USCA4 Appeal: 24-6683 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/05/2025 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6683

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TEKOA TOBIAS GLOVER, a/k/a Toby, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, Chief District Judge. (6:18-cr-00588-TMC-1; 6:23-cv- 03786-TMC)

Submitted: January 31, 2025 Decided: March 5, 2025

Before GREGORY and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tekoa T. Glover, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 24-6683 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/05/2025 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM: Tekoa Glover seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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)).

Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Glover’s informal brief, we conclude that Glover has not made the requisite showing. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

 We construe Glover’s informal brief, which he filed within 60 days of the court’s dismissal order, as the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal from that order. See Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49 (1992) (holding that appellate brief may serve as functional equivalent of notice of appeal provided it otherwise complies with rules governing proper timing and substance).

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6683 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/05/2025 Pg: 3 of 3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED