Case Name: John PORTEE, Jr., a/k/a John H. Portee, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-11-29
Citations: 671 F. App'x 100
Docket Number: No. 16-6365
Parties: John PORTEE, Jr., a/k/a John H. Portee, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 671
Pages: 100–101

Head Matter:
John PORTEE, Jr., a/k/a John H. Portee, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert STEVENSON, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-6365
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: November 18, 2016
Decided: November 29, 2016
John Portee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Don-áld John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Portee, Jr., 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. § 2258(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 Portee 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