Case Name: Rodger Dale MITCHELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Karen PSZCZOLKOWSKI, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-13
Citations: 685 F. App'x 215
Docket Number: No. 16-7434
Parties: Rodger Dale MITCHELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Karen PSZCZOLKOWSKI, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 685
Pages: 215–215

Head Matter:
Rodger Dale MITCHELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Karen PSZCZOLKOWSKI, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-7434
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 31, 2017
Decided: April 13, 2017
Rodger Dale Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. Zachary Aaron Viglianco, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rodger Dale Mitchell seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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) (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 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 Mitchell 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