Donnell Dyer-El v. United States ( 2020 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 20-7147
DONNELL M. DYER-EL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; MARK J. BOLSTER, Acting Warden;
FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX, Medium, Petersburg, VA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., District Judge. (3:19-cv-00365-JAG-RCY)
Submitted: December 17, 2020 Decided: December 22, 2020
Before THACKER, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donnell M. Dyer-El, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donnell M. Dyer-El, a District of Columbia Code offender, incarcerated at FCI
Petersburg, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of
appealability. * 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, 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 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 Dyer-El 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
*
Because Dyer-El was convicted in a District of Columbia court, he is required to
obtain a certificate of appealability in order to appeal the denial of his § 2241 petition. See
Madley v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
2