Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Wayne MONROE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-02
Citations: 667 F. App'x 812
Docket Number: No. 16-6737
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Wayne MONROE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 667
Pages: 812–813

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Wayne MONROE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-6737
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2016
Decided: August 2, 2016
Kenneth Wayne Monroe, Appellant Pro Se. Jason Harris Cowley, Assistant United States Attorney, James J. Kurosad, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Wayne Monroe seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability 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 motion 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 Monroe has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Monroe's motion to expedite decision and 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