Case Name: Gary Robert MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gregory KNOWLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-01-19
Citations: 407 F. App'x 712
Docket Number: No. 10-7190
Parties: Gary Robert MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gregory KNOWLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 407
Pages: 712–713

Head Matter:
Gary Robert MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gregory KNOWLIN, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 10-7190.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 13, 2011.
Decided: Jan. 19, 2011.
Gary Robert Moore, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gary Robert Moore seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge to deny relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition, and denying a certificate of appealability. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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 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 Moore 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.