Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier Corona BARAJAS, a/k/a Jose Hernandez Martinez, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-05-27
Citations: 604 F. App'x 297
Docket Number: No. 15-6412
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier Corona BARAJAS, a/k/a Jose Hernandez Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 604
Pages: 297–297

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier Corona BARAJAS, a/k/a Jose Hernandez Martinez, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-6412.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 21, 2015.
Decided: May 27, 2015.
Javier Corona Barajas, Appellant Pro Se. Melissa Elaine O’Boyle, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Javier Corona Barajas seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 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 Barajas 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.