Case Name: Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patrice E. LEWIS, Judge; Ben C. Clyburn, Chief Judge; Douglas F. Gansler; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-05-04
Citations: 427 F. App'x 258
Docket Number: No. 11-6271
Parties: Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patrice E. LEWIS, Judge; Ben C. Clyburn, Chief Judge; Douglas F. Gansler; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 427
Pages: 258–259

Head Matter:
Jerome Julius BROWN, Sr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Patrice E. LEWIS, Judge; Ben C. Clyburn, Chief Judge; Douglas F. Gansler; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 11-6271.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 22, 2011.
Decided: May 4, 2011.
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jerome Julius Brown, Sr. seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion to reopen after the district court dismissed his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2010) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (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 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 Brown 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.