Roman Perdono v. Department of Public Safety

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6873 Doc: 9 Filed: 12/07/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-6873
ROMAN DALACIO PERDONO,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (5:23-hc-02007-FL)
Submitted: November 13, 2023 Decided: December 7, 2023
Before GREGORY and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roman Dalacio Perdono, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-6873 Doc: 9 Filed: 12/07/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Roman Dalacio Perdono seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28
U.S.C. § 2254 petition as an unauthorized, successive § 2254 petition. 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 Perdono 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
2