Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roy Keith LUCAS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-25
Citations: 440 F. App'x 188
Docket Number: No. 11-6431
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roy Keith LUCAS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 440
Pages: 188–189

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Roy Keith LUCAS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-6431.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 21, 2011.
Decided: July 25, 2011.
Roy Keith Lucas, Appellant pro se. Stanley Duane Ragsdale, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Roy Keith Lucas seeks to appeal the district court's order granting in part his Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion to reopen, but denying him relief from its prior decision on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 370 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (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 Lucas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.