Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eric Darnell REESE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-25
Citations: 539 F. App'x 277
Docket Number: No. 12-7891
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eric Darnell REESE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 539
Pages: 277–277

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eric Darnell REESE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-7891.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 17, 2013.
Decided: Sept. 25, 2013.
Eric Darnell Reese, Appellant Pro Se. Sujit Raman, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Eric Darnell Reese seeks to appeal the district court's order, dismissing as unauthorized his successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2013) motion. The district court's dismissal order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). 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) (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 Reese 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.