Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Toby HUNTER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-28
Citations: 671 F. App'x 51
Docket Number: No. 16-6800
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Toby HUNTER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 671
Pages: 51–52

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Toby HUNTER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-6800
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 22, 2016
Decided: November 28, 2016
Toby Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Bain-Creed, Maria Kathleen Vento, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Toby Hunter 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 certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a cqnstitutional 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 Hunter 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