Albert Green, Jr. v. Ben Anderson

USCA4 Appeal: 24-6809 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/31/2025 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-6809 ALBERT LEROY GREEN, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. BEN ANDERSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (3:23-cv-00668-MR) Submitted: March 27, 2025 Decided: March 31, 2025 Before THACKER and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Albert Leroy Green, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-6809 Doc: 9 Filed: 03/31/2025 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Albert Leroy Green, Jr., 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. 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, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 (2017). 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 Green has not made the requisite showing. Before filing a habeas petition in federal court, a § 2254 petitioner must exhaust all available state court remedies, 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(A), and we discern no error in the district court’s finding that Green failed to exhaust his state court remedies before seeking relief under § 2254. 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