Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bryan Keith NOEL, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-06-23
Citations: 692 F. App'x 128
Docket Number: No. 17-6296
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bryan Keith NOEL, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 692
Pages: 128–129

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Bryan Keith NOEL, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6296
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 20, 2017
Decided: June 23, 2017
Bryan Keith Noel, Appellant Pro Se. Melissa Louise Rikard, Edward R. Ryan, Assistant United States Attorneys, Benjamin Bain-Creed, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Bryan Keith Noel seeks to appeal the district court's orders dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion and denying his motion for reconsideration. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 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 Noel 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