Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dain Claude McCALLA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-08
Citations: 415 F. App'x 467
Docket Number: No. 10-7293
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dain Claude McCALLA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 415
Pages: 467–467

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dain Claude McCALLA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-7293.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2011.
Decided: March 8, 2011.
Dain Claude McCalla, Appellant Pro Se. Stacy Dawson Belf, Bryan E. Foreman, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Dain Claude McCalla seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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 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 McCalla has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny McCalla's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny McCalla's motions to expedite as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.