Simaron D. Hill v. Todd Ishee

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-6810
SIMARON D. HILL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
TODD ISHEE,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:24-cv-00413-WO-JLW)
Submitted: November 4, 2024 Decided: November 22, 2024
Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Simaron D. Hill, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Simaron D. Hill seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the
recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing Hill’s 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); Jones
v. Braxton, 392 F.3d 683, 688 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 Hill has not made the
requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Hill’s motion
to expedite as moot, 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 --