# Bryant Brown v. Jeffrey Dillman

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · February 25, 2014 · 556 F. App'x 268

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2654474

## Case

- **Full name:** Bryant Lee BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Jeffrey N. DILLMAN, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** February 25, 2014
- **Citations:** 556 F. App'x 268
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Niemeyer, Motz, Shedd
- **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/2654474

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7832

BRYANT LEE BROWN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN JEFFREY N. DILLMAN,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema,
District Judge. (1:13-cv-00924-LMB-JFA)

Submitted: February 18, 2014 Decided: February 25, 2014

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Bryant Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Bryant Lee Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing as time-barred his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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 would

find that the district 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). 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. Slack,

529 U.S. at 484-85.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

2
presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

3

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/2654474. Public record. Not legal advice.