Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy Esqueda FRAUSTI, a/k/a Sammy Esqueda Frausto, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-02-28
Citations: 678 F. App'x 149
Docket Number: No. 16-7403
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy Esqueda FRAUSTI, a/k/a Sammy Esqueda Frausto, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 678
Pages: 149–150

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sammy Esqueda FRAUSTI, a/k/a Sammy Esqueda Frausto, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-7403
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: February 17, 2017
Decided: February 28, 2017
Sammy Esqueda Frausti, Appellant Pro Se.
"Steven R. Kaufman, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sammy Esqueda Frausti seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of ap-pealability. 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 Frausti 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