# United States v. Shaun Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · July 31, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11112947

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** July 31, 2025
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11112947

## Opinion text

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6644 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/31/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-6644

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SHAUN BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, Chief District Judge. (2:17-cr-00169-JKW-DEM-1; 2:21-cv-
00377)

Submitted: July 29, 2025 Decided: July 31, 2025

Before KING, WYNN, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan I. Edelstein, EDELSTEIN & GROSSMAN, New York, New York, for Appellant.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6644 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/31/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Through counsel, Shaun Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 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 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). When 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)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brown 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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11112947. Public record. Not legal advice.