Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sherod MAIR, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-06-03
Citations: 434 F. App'x 184
Docket Number: No. 10-6884
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sherod MAIR, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 434
Pages: 184–185

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sherod MAIR, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-6884.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 23, 2011.
Decided: June 3, 2011.
Sherod Mair, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Sherod Hastings Mair seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certifícate of appeal-ability 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 Mair 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.