Jamiel M. Hargrove v. Israel Hamilton

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 21-7126
JAMIEL M. HARGROVE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
ISRAEL HAMILTON,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, Senior District Judge. (1:20-cv-01188-LO-JFA)
Submitted: August 30, 2022 Decided: September 14, 2022
Before NIEMEYER and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jamiel M. Hargrove, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jamiel M. Hargrove seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 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 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).
Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Hargrove’s informal brief,
we conclude that Hargrove 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
presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED

-- 2 of 2 --