US v. Kevin Brogden

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion certificate of appealability (Local Rule 22(a)) [998551257-2] Originating case number: 1:07-cr-00411-JAB-1,1:10-cv-00023-JAB-WWD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998868156]. Mailed to: Brogden. [11-6195]

Appeal: 11-6195

Doc: 20

Filed: 06/05/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6195

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
KEVIN BRYANT BROGDEN,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham.
James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge.
(1:07-cr-00411-JAB-1; 1:10-cv-00023-JABWWD)

Submitted:

April 13, 2012

Decided:

June 5, 2012

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Bryant Brogden, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-6195

Doc: 20

Filed: 06/05/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Kevin

Bryant

Brogden

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West
Supp.

2011)

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)

(2006).

A

certificate

of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of
the denial of a constitutional right.”
(2006).

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)

When the district court denies relief on the merits, a

prisoner

satisfies

this

jurists

would

reasonable

standard
find

by

that

demonstrating

the

district

that

court’s

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong.
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
denies

relief

demonstrate

both

on

procedural

that

the

When the district court

grounds,

dispositive

the

prisoner

procedural

ruling

must
is

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the
denial of a constitutional right.

Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude
that Brogden has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly,

we deny Brogden’s motion for a certificate of appealability and
dismiss the appeal.
facts

and

legal

We dispense with oral argument because the

contentions

are

2

adequately

presented

in

the

Appeal: 11-6195

Doc: 20

materials

before

Filed: 06/05/2012

the

court

Pg: 3 of 3

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional process.
DISMISSED

3