Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohamed Hassan SOLIMAN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-24
Citations: 392 F. App'x 196
Docket Number: No. 09-7265
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohamed Hassan SOLIMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 392
Pages: 196–197

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohamed Hassan SOLIMAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-7265.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 13, 2010.
Decided: Aug. 24, 2010.
Mohamed Hassan Solimán, Appellant Pro Se. Robert John Krask, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mohamed Hassan Solimán seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appeal-ability 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 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 Solimán has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. In addition, we deny Soliman's motion for appointment of counsel. 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.