Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Perry Roger SHIPPY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-09-01
Citations: 613 F. App'x 272
Docket Number: No. 15-6993
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Perry Roger SHIPPY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 613
Pages: 272–273

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Perry Roger SHIPPY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-6993.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 27, 2015.
Decided: Sept. 1, 2015.
Perry Roger Shippy, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Jill Westmoreland Rose, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Perry Roger Shippy 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 appeal-ability. 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 Shippy 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.