UNITED STATES v. BARNES (2019)

Rodney Wayne Barnes seeks to appeal the district court's orders construing his postjudgment motions as unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motions and dismissing them without prejudice on that basis. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the Appellant's brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Barnes’ informal brief does not challenge the district court's conclusion that his motions were unauthorized successive § 2255 motions, Barnes has forfeited appellate review of the court's orders. 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 orders. We deny as unnecessary a certificate of appealability. See Harbison v. Bell, 556 U.S. 180, 183, 129 S.Ct. 1481, 173 L.Ed.2d 347 (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

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.