Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio Jermaine MOORE, a/k/a 10-4, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-22
Citations: 696 F. App'x 124
Docket Number: No. 17-6671
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio Jermaine MOORE, a/k/a 10-4, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 696
Pages: 124–125

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio Jermaine MOORE, a/k/a 10-4, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6671
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 17, 2017
Decided: August 22, 2017
Antonio Jermaine Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Jason Harris Cowley, Rudy E. Renfer, Seth Morgan Wood, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before KEENAN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Jermaine Moore 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 Moore has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Moore's motion for 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