Case Name: Lacy Lee WILLIAMS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-04-21
Citations: 645 F. App'x 285
Docket Number: No. 15-7837
Parties: Lacy Lee WILLIAMS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 645
Pages: 285–285

Head Matter:
Lacy Lee WILLIAMS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 15-7837.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 19, 2016.
Decided: April 21, 2016.
Lacy Lee Williams, Jr,, Appellant Pro, Se.
Before AGEE, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Lacy Lee Williams, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 satisfíés 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 Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, based on the sound reasoning of the district court, we deny a certificate of appeal-ability, 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.