Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oluwasegun OGUN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-29
Citations: 697 F. App'x 151
Docket Number: No. 17-6773
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oluwasegun OGUN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oluwasegun OGUN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6773
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 24, 2017
Decided: August 29, 2017
Oluwasegun Ogun, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Bradenham, II, Eric Matthew Hurt, Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorneys, Amy Elizabeth Cross, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Andrew Lamont Creighton, Rachel E. Timm, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Oluwasegun Ogun seeks to appeal the district court's order construing his motion challenging his criminal judgment as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and dismissing it as successive. The order is not ap-pealable unless a circuit 'justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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 Ogun 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