United States of America v. Tekoa Tobias Glover, a/k/a Toby

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6683
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TEKOA TOBIAS GLOVER, a/k/a Toby,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, Chief District Judge. (6:18-cr-00588-TMC-1; 6:23-cv-
03786-TMC)
Submitted: January 31, 2025 Decided: March 5, 2025
Before GREGORY and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tekoa T. Glover, Appellant Pro Se. Justin William Holloway, Assistant United States
Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Tekoa Glover seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his
28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge
issues a certificate of appealability. 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, 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 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)).
Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Glover’s informal brief, we
conclude that Glover has not made the requisite showing. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see also
Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important
document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that
brief.”). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
 We construe Glover’s informal brief, which he filed within 60 days of the court’s
dismissal order, as the functional equivalent of a notice of appeal from that order. See
Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49 (1992) (holding that appellate brief may serve as
functional equivalent of notice of appeal provided it otherwise complies with rules
governing proper timing and substance).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED

-- 3 of 3 --