Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronnie Donte RAND, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-22
Citations: 641 F. App'x 292
Docket Number: No. 15-7802
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronnie Donte RAND, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 641
Pages: 292–293

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronnie Donte RAND, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-7802.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 17, 2016.
Decided: March 22, 2016.
Ronnie Donte Rand, Appellant Pro Se. Ethan A. Ontjes, Stephen Aubrey West, Assistant United States Attorneys, Seth Morgan Wood, Office of the United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronnie Donte Rand seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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 constitu tional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rand 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.