Brian Farabee v. Commissioner of the VA Dept of Behavioral Health

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6774 Doc: 18 Filed: 03/04/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6774

BRIAN D. FARABEE, Petitioner - Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES; DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD; DIRECTOR OF THE WILLIAMSBURG COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD; SUPERINTENDENT OF VIRGINIA PENINSULA REGIONAL JAIL; SUPERINTENDENT OF VIRGINIA BEACH CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX; DIRECTOR OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:24-cv-00493-AWA-LRL)

Submitted: February 24, 2026 Decided: March 4, 2026

Before GREGORY, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian Damon Farabee, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6774 Doc: 18 Filed: 03/04/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM: Brian D. Farabee seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Farabee’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust available state court remedies. 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 the district court denies relief on the merits, a petitioner 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).

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the petitioner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling was wrong or 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 Farabee has not shown that the dispositive procedural ruling was wrong or debatable. * Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny the pending motions, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

* We express no view on the merits of Farabee’s claims and note that our dismissal is without prejudice to Farabee reasserting his claims at the appropriate time.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6774 Doc: 18 Filed: 03/04/2026 Pg: 3 of 3 presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED