Case Name: Marston Edward BLUE, Defendant-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-30
Citations: 445 F. App'x 679
Docket Number: No. 11-6667
Parties: Marston Edward BLUE, Defendant—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 445
Pages: 679–679

Head Matter:
Marston Edward BLUE, Defendant—Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee.
No. 11-6667.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 25, 2011.
Decided: Aug. 30, 2011.
Marston Edward Blue, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart A. Berman, Chan Park, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland; Sandra Wilkinson, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marston Edward Blue appeals the district court's order denying his application for a certificate of appealability. 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) (2006). 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 v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. 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.
AFFIRMED.