Case Name: Willie Sanford LOYD, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; James A. Cales, Jr., Judge; Morton V. Whitlow, Judge; Ben Wright, Warden, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-31
Citations: 474 F. App'x 309
Docket Number: No. 12-6542
Parties: Willie Sanford LOYD, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; James A. Cales, Jr., Judge; Morton V. Whitlow, Judge; Ben Wright, Warden, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 309–310

Head Matter:
Willie Sanford LOYD, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; James A. Cales, Jr., Judge; Morton V. Whitlow, Judge; Ben Wright, Warden, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 12-6542.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 17, 2012.
Decided: July 31, 2012.
Willie Sanford Loyd, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Willie Sanford Loyd, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certifícate 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 Loyd has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Loyd's motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for a transcript, deny a certifícate 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.