Case Name: Willie Joe CALDWELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael McCALL, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-12-06
Citations: 547 F. App'x 355
Docket Number: No. 13-7209
Parties: Willie Joe CALDWELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael McCALL, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 547
Pages: 355–356

Head Matter:
Willie Joe CALDWELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael McCALL, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 13-7209.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 21, 2013.
Decided: Dec. 6, 2013.
Willie Joe Caldwell, Appellant Pro Se. Brendan McDonald, Office of the United States Attorney, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER • CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Willie Joe Caldwell seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his motion to reconsider the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) 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) (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 petition 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 Caldwell 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.