Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Lamont JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-23
Citations: 519 F. App'x 172
Docket Number: No. 13-6287
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Lamont JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 519
Pages: 172–172

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mario Lamont JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-6287.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 18, 2013.
Decided: April 23, 2013.
Mario Lamont Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mario Lamont Johnson seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012) motion. The- order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). 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). 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 Johnson 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.