Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Doris Denise FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-29
Citations: 580 F. App'x 158
Docket Number: No. 14-6695
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Doris Denise FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 580
Pages: 158–158

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Doris Denise FOSTER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 14-6695.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 24, 2014.
Decided: July 29, 2014.
Doris Denise Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Michael Kent, Jill Westmoreland Rose, Office of the United States Attorney, Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; William Michael Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Thomas A. O’Mal-ley, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before FLOYD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Doris Foster seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on her 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 Foster 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.