Case Name: Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David L. SIMON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee, and David L. Simmons, Superintendent; David Simons, Superintendent, Respondents
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-10-05
Citations: 449 F. App'x 280
Docket Number: No. 11-6993
Parties: Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. David L. SIMON, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee, and David L. Simmons, Superintendent; David Simons, Superintendent, Respondents.
Judges: Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 449
Pages: 280–281

Head Matter:
Gary Buterra WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. David L. SIMON, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee, and David L. Simmons, Superintendent; David Simons, Superintendent, Respondents.
No. 11-6993.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2011.
Decided: Oct. 5, 2011.
Gary Buterra Williams, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gary Buterra Williams, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2011) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certifícate 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 Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Williams' motion for a writ of prohibition, 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.