Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cedric Monte LITTLE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-10-19
Citations: 620 F. App'x 163
Docket Number: No. 15-6822
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cedric Monte LITTLE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 620
Pages: 163–163

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cedric Monte LITTLE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-6822.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 15, 2015.
Decided: Oct. 19, 2015.
Cedric Monte Little, Appellant Pro Se. John Howarth Bennett, Seth Morgan Wood, Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, North Carolina, for Appel-lee.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cedric Monte Little seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his motions seeking relief from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and reconsideration. The orders is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(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) (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 Little 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.