Case Name: Dale Wallace GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank J. BISHOP, Defendant-Appellee, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-04-01
Citations: 564 F. App'x 43
Docket Number: No. 13-8048
Parties: Dale Wallace GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank J. BISHOP, Defendant-Appellee, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 564
Pages: 43–44

Head Matter:
Dale Wallace GREEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Warden Frank J. BISHOP, Defendant-Appellee, Attorney General of Maryland, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 13-8048.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 27, 2014.
Decided: April 1, 2014.
Dale Wallace Green, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondent.
Before MOTZ, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dale Wallace Green appeals the district court's order dismissing as unauthorized his successive 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(e)(1)(A) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). A certificate of appeal-ability 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 Green 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.