Case Name: Jose Reyes AREVALOS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Joseph MCFADDEN, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-12-22
Citations: 707 F. App'x 147
Docket Number: No. 17-7347
Parties: Jose Reyes AREVALOS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Joseph MCFADDEN, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 707
Pages: 147–148

Head Matter:
Jose Reyes AREVALOS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Joseph MCFADDEN, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 17-7347
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: December 19, 2017
Decided: December 22, 2017
Jose Reyes Arevalos, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General, Sherrie Ann Butterbaugh, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jose Reyes Arevalos seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) 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) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability will 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 Arevalos has not made the requisite showing. 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