Case Name: Willie BRANCH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Justin F. ANDREWS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-12-19
Citations: 588 F. App'x 238
Docket Number: No. 14-7549
Parties: Willie BRANCH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Justin F. ANDREWS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before DUNCAN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 588
Pages: 238–239

Head Matter:
Willie BRANCH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Justin F. ANDREWS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 14-7549.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 16, 2014.
Decided: Dec. 19, 2014.
Willie Branch, Appellant Pro Se.
Before DUNCAN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Willie Branch, a prisoner in custody under a sentence imposed by the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition, which the district court also construed as a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.' 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. § 2258(c)(2) (2012). 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 v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Branch has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Branch's motions for transcript at government expense and for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, 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.