Case Name: Victor Eugene VICK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-21
Citations: 670 F. App'x 78
Docket Number: No. 16-6946
Parties: Victor Eugene VICK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 670
Pages: 78–79

Head Matter:
Victor Eugene VICK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-6946
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 18, 2016
Decided: October 21, 2016
Victor Eugene Vick, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Victor Eugene Vick seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition and denying relief on his subsequent motion for reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability mil not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When 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. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Vick has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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