U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2025

Jonathan Vejarano v. Chadwick Dotson

Jonathan Vejarano v. Chadwick Dotson
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided July 8, 2025

Jonathan Vejarano v. Chadwick Dotson

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7066 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/08/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7066

JONATHAN JULIAN VEJARANO, Petitioner - Appellant, v. CHADWICK DOTSON, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00430-JAG)

Submitted: June 13, 2025 Decided: July 8, 2025

Before KING and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ashwin Shandilya, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7066 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/08/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Jonathan Julian Vejarano seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. 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, as here, 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, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 (2017).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Vejarano 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.