Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Muttaqin Fatir ABDULLAH, a/k/a King, a/k/a Clayton Montray Pinckney, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-11-30
Citations: 402 F. App'x 806
Docket Number: No. 10-6899
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Muttaqin Fatir ABDULLAH, a/k/a King, a/k/a Clayton Montray Pinckney, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 402
Pages: 806–807

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Muttaqin Fatir ABDULLAH, a/k/a King, a/k/a Clayton Montray Pinckney, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 10-6899.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 18, 2010.
Decided: Nov. 30, 2010.
Muttaqin Fatir Abdullah, Appellant Pro Se. James Chris Leventis, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Muttaqin Fatir Abdullah seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable un less a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 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 Abdullah has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Abdullah's motion for 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.