# Jivon Brown v. Ronald Weber

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · September 23, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11143514

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 23, 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- **Precedential status:** Unpublished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/11143514

## Opinion text

USCA4 Appeal: 25-6444 Doc: 9 Filed: 09/23/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-6444

JIVON BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

RONALD WEBER, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Ellen Lipton Hollander, Senior District Judge. (1:22-cv-01894-ELH)

Submitted: September 18, 2025 Decided: September 23, 2025

Before THACKER and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jivon Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 25-6444 Doc: 9 Filed: 09/23/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Jivon Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his

28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and denying reconsideration. The orders are 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 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 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 Brown has not made

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Brown’s motion to appoint counsel, and

motion for 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/11143514. Public record. Not legal advice.