United States v. Samuel Courtney

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6338 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAMUEL LEE COURTNEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. James P. Jones, District Judge. (2:15-cr-00015-JPJ-PMS-9; 2:19-cv-81351- JPJ-PMS) Submitted: July 16, 2019 Decided: July 19, 2019 Before MOTZ, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel Lee Courtney, Appellant Pro Se. Erin Marie Harrigan Kulpa, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Samuel Lee Courtney appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant’s brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Courtney’s informal brief does not challenge the basis for the district court’s disposition, Courtney has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. See 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 affirm the district court’s judgment and deny Courtney’s motions for a transcript at the Government’s expense and to appoint counsel. We also deny as unnecessary a certificate of appealability. See Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183 (2009). 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. AFFIRMED 2