Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lawrence Stafford DAVIS, a/k/a Larry, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-02-19
Citations: 593 F. App'x 236
Docket Number: No. 14-7843
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lawrence Stafford DAVIS, a/k/a Larry, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 593
Pages: 236–236

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lawrence Stafford DAVIS, a/k/a Larry, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-7843.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 12, 2015.
Decided: Feb. 19, 2015.
Lawrence Stafford Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Frank Delay, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lawrence Stafford Davis seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as successive and unauthorized. The order is not ap-pealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 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 Davis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certifícate 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.