Case Name: David FELTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Claudette EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-21
Citations: 702 F. App'x 191
Docket Number: No. 17-6946
Parties: David FELTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Claudette EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges,
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 702
Pages: 191–192

Head Matter:
David FELTON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Claudette EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 17-6946
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 16, 2017
Decided: November 21, 2017
David Felton, Appellant Pro Se.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges,

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Felton seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2264 (2012) petition as successive and unauthorized. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 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 Felton 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