Case Name: Stanley Lorenzo WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Robert W. SMITH, Supt.; Secretary of Corrections, Theodis Beck, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-28
Citations: 475 F. App'x 893
Docket Number: No. 12-6710
Parties: Stanley Lorenzo WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Robert W. SMITH, Supt.; Secretary of Corrections, Theodis Beck, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 893–894

Head Matter:
Stanley Lorenzo WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Robert W. SMITH, Supt.; Secretary of Corrections, Theodis Beck, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 12-6710.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 10, 2012.
Decided: Aug. 28, 2012.
Stanley Lorenzo Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Stanley Lorenzo Williams seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition and his "Motion for an Order to Enlarge the Time to File Amendments/And Request for an Expedited Ruling on the Matter Given the Clear and Undisputed Constitutional Violation." The district court's order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (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 Williams 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.