Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jamar Rashaad HODGE, a/k/a Black J, a/k/a Dennis Jordan, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-24
Citations: 699 F. App'x 254
Docket Number: No. 17-7037
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jamar Rashaad HODGE, a/k/a Black J, a/k/a Dennis Jordan, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 699
Pages: 254–255

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jamar Rashaad HODGE, a/k/a Black J, a/k/a Dennis Jordan, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-7037
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 19, 2017
Decided: October 24, 2017
Jamar Rashaad Hodge, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Bradenham, II, Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorneys, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jamar Rashaad Hodge seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 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 Hodge 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