Chief) Col. Michael S. Owlfeather-Gorbey v. WARDEN, FCI Beckley

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-6879
(CHIEF) COL. MICHAEL S. OWLFEATHER-GORBEY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, FCI Beckley,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at
Beckley. Frank W. Volk, District Judge. (5:22-cv-00138)
Submitted: September 5, 2023 Decided: September 11, 2023
Before KING, AGEE, and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael S. Owlfeather-Gorbey, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
(Chief) Col. Michael S. Owlfeather-Gorbey, a District of Columbia offender, seeks
to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge
and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition without prejudice. The order is not appealable
unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1); Madley v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 278 F.3d 1306, 1310 (D.C. Cir. 2002); cf.
Jones v. Hendrix, 143 S. Ct. 1857, 1864, 1868 (2023); In re Wright, 826 F.3d 774, 783 (4th
Cir. 2016). 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, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 (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 Owlfeather-Gorbey
has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability,
deny the pending motion, 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 of 2 --