Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee PERNELL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-06-07
Citations: 691 F. App'x 709
Docket Number: No. 17-6104
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee PERNELL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 691
Pages: 709–710

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Lee PERNELL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6104
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 30, 2017
Decided: June 7, 2017
Robert Lee Pernell, Appellant Pro Se. Oliva L. Norman, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Robert Lee Pernell, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of ap-pealability. 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 Pernell 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