Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leroy Joseph KELLY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-08-26
Citations: 538 F. App'x 327
Docket Number: No. 13-6592
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leroy Joseph KELLY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 538
Pages: 327–328

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leroy Joseph KELLY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-6592.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 22, 2013.
Decided: Aug. 26, 2013.
Leroy J. Kelly, Appellant Pro Se. C. Nicks Williams, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Leroy Joseph Kelly seeks to appeal the district court's order treating his Fed. R.Civ.P. 60(d) motion of independent action as a successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2013) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 Kelly 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.