Opinion
22-6075
06-01-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TROY RAYNARD ALEXANDER, Defendant-Appellant.
Troy Raynard Alexander, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: January 31, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:15-cr-00103-CCE; 1:20-cv-00567-CCE-LPA)
Troy Raynard Alexander, Appellant Pro Se.
Before DIAZ, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM.
Troy Raynard Alexander seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and his subsequent motion under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). The orders are 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, 137 S.Ct. 759, 773-74 (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 Alexander 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.