Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Craig WINKEY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-20
Citations: 474 F. App'x 385
Docket Number: No. 12-6340
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Craig WINKEY, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 385–386

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Craig WINKEY, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 12-6340.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 17, 2012.
Decided: July 20, 2012.
Craig Winkey, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Lynn Dwyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Craig Winkey seeks to appeal the distinct court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.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) (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 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 Winkey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.