Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan LAGUNAS-MUNOZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-06-26
Citations: 576 F. App'x 251
Docket Number: No. 14-6248
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan LAGUNAS-MUNOZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 576
Pages: 251–251

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ivan LAGUNAS-MUNOZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-6248.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 19, 2014.
Decided: June 26, 2014.
Ivan Lagunas-Munoz, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Burke Moorman, Office of the United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ivan Lagunas-Munoz seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as untimely. 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 Lagunas-Munoz has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility 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.