Brandon Thompson Appeal Dismissed by Fourth Circuit

4th Circuit Daily Opinions

Filed March 3rd, 2026

Detected March 4th, 2026

Summary

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Brandon J. Thompson's appeal of a district court order denying his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The court found that Thompson failed to make the requisite showing for a certificate of appealability, thus denying the appeal.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has dismissed the appeal of Brandon J. Thompson, who sought to challenge a district court's order denying his motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The court determined that Thompson did not meet the standard for a certificate of appealability, which requires a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Specifically, the court found that reasonable jurists could not find the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong, nor could they find the procedural ruling debatable when denying relief on procedural grounds.

This decision means the appeal is officially closed, and Thompson's request for relief has been denied at this appellate level. As this is an unpublished opinion, it does not set binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit. No further action is required by regulated entities, as this pertains to an individual criminal defendant's appeal process.

Source document (simplified)

UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES CO URT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH C IRCUIT No. 25-6339 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRANDON J. THOM PSON, Defendant - Appella nt. Appeal from t he United States District Court for the District of South Carol ina, at Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District J udge. (3:18- cr -00203- MGL - 1; 3:21- cv -03493-MG L) Submitted: Febru ary 26, 2026 Decided: M arch 3, 20 26 Before NIEM EYER an d QUATTLE BAUM, Circuit Judges, and FL OYD, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublis hed per curiam opinion. Brandon J. Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM: Brandon J. Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s orde r denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, as amended. The order is not appealable u nless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealabilit y. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (1)(B). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substan tial showing of the de nial of a constit utional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2 253(c)(2). When the district court denies re lief on the merits, a prisoner sat isfies this standard by demonstra ting that r easonable j urists could find the district court’s assessm ent of the constitutiona l claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 1 15-17 (2017). When the district co urt denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstr ate bot h that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and th at the motion states a debatable claim of th e denia l of a constitutiona l righ t. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independen tly reviewed t he record and conclude that Tho mpson has not made the requisite showing. Accordi ngly, we deny a certificate of appealabilit y and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argu ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED