Case Name: Eugene Ernst JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.R. CARAWAY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-20
Citations: 470 F. App'x 175
Docket Number: No. 11-7716
Parties: Eugene Ernst JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.R. CARAWAY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 470
Pages: 175–176

Head Matter:
Eugene Ernst JACKSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.R. CARAWAY, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 11-7716.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 15, 2012.
Decided: March 20, 2012.
Eugene Ernst Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Joshua L. Kaul, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Eugene Ernst Jackson seeks to appeal the district court's order treating his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West Supp.2011) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. 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 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 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 Jackson 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.