Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard L. BRYANT, a/k/a Pumpkin, a/k/a Rock, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-08-29
Citations: 697 F. App'x 144
Docket Number: No. 17-6603
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard L. BRYANT, a/k/a Pumpkin, a/k/a Rock, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 144–145

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard L. BRYANT, a/k/a Pumpkin, a/k/a Rock, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 17-6603
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: August 11, 2017
Decided: August 29, 2017
Richard L. Bryant, Appellant Pro Se. V. Kathleen Dougherty, Alyssa Kate Nichol, Elizabeth Marie Yusi, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Melissa Elaine O’Boyle, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Richard L. Bryant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on 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 constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bryant 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