Case Name: Donald Ray CLINE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael BALL, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-04
Citations: 669 F. App'x 153
Docket Number: No. 16-6848
Parties: Donald Ray CLINE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael BALL, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 669
Pages: 153–153

Head Matter:
Donald Ray CLINE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael BALL, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-6848
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: September 29, 2016
Decided: October 4, 2016
Donald Ray Cline, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donald Ray Cline, Jr. seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 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 Cline has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Cline's motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in for-ma 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