United States v. Amir Khayyat
United States v. Amir Khayyat
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 25-6446 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/04/2025 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 25-6446
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
AMIR SALVATORE KHAYYAT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Kenneth D. Bell, District Judge. (3:20-cr-00371-KDB-DCK-1, 3:25-cv-00157- KDB)
Submitted: October 30, 2025 Decided: November 4, 2025
Before RUSHING and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Amir Salvatore Khayyat, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-6446 Doc: 11 Filed: 11/04/2025 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Amir Salvatore Khayyat seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as
untimely his
28 U.S.C. § 2255motion. See Whiteside v. United States,
775 F.3d 180, 182-83(4th Cir. 2014) (en banc) (explaining that § 2255 motions are subject to one-year
statute of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in
28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)). 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 petition 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 Khayyat 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
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished