Michael Jones v. Mary Locklear ( 2024 )

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6733 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/22/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6733
MICHAEL CONTREZ JONES,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN MARY LOCKLEAR,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:24-hc-02110-BO-RJ)
Submitted: November 19, 2024 Decided: November 22, 2024
Before QUATTLEBAUM, RUSHING, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Contrez Jones, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 24-6733 Doc: 10 Filed: 11/22/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Michael Contrez Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28
U.S.C. § 2254 petition as successive and unauthorized. The order is 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, as here, 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 Jones has not made
the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Jones’s 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