Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jay Avery JENERETTE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-29
Citations: 579 F. App'x 221
Docket Number: No. 14-6618
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jay Avery JENERETTE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 579
Pages: 221–221

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jay Avery JENERETTE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-6618.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 24, 2014.
Decided: July 29, 2014.
Jay Avery Jenerette, Appellant Pro Se. Seth Morgan Wood, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jay Avery Jenerette seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(B) (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). 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. 478, 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 Jenerette 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.