Case Name: Billy F. LARKIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Johnny HAWKINS, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-03
Citations: 698 F. App'x 122
Docket Number: No. 17-6631
Parties: Billy F. LARKIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Johnny HAWKINS, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 698
Pages: 122–123

Head Matter:
Billy F. LARKIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Johnny HAWKINS, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 17-6631
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: September 26, 2017
Decided: October 3, 2017
Billy F. Larkin, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees,
Before WILKINSON, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Billy F. Larkin seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 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 Larkin has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Larkin's motion for a certificate of appealability, 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED