Case Name: Larry Donnell JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-08-05
Citations: 390 F. App'x 236
Docket Number: No. 10-6139
Parties: Larry Donnell JONES, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 390
Pages: 236–236

Head Matter:
Larry Donnell JONES, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 10-6139.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit;
Submitted: July 27, 2010.
Decided: Aug. 5, 2010.
Larry Donnell Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.'
PER CURIAM:
Larry Donnell Jones seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appeal-ability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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 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 Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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.