Case Name: Melvin Elpido Medina FUNEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert C. LEWIS; Lafayette Hall, Respondent-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-10-16
Citations: 482 F. App'x 855
Docket Number: No. 12-7228
Parties: Melvin Elpido Medina FUNEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert C. LEWIS; Lafayette Hall, Respondent-Appellees.
Judges: Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 482
Pages: 855–856

Head Matter:
Melvin Elpido Medina FUNEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert C. LEWIS; Lafayette Hall, Respondent-Appellees.
No. 12-7228.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 5, 2012.
Decided: Oct. 16, 2012.
Melvin Elpido Medina Funez, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Melvin Elpido Medina Funez seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 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) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 Funez 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.