Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arthur Lee WALKER, a/k/a Ace, a/k/a Florida, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-09-15
Citations: 668 F. App'x 519
Docket Number: No. 16-6616
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arthur Lee WALKER, a/k/a Ace, a/k/a Florida, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 668
Pages: 519–520

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arthur Lee WALKER, a/k/a Ace, a/k/a Florida, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 16-6616
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: September 13, 2016
Decided: September 15, 2016
Arthur Lee Walker, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Thomas Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia; Jarod James Douglas, Robert Hugh McWilliams, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Arthur Lee Walker seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2258(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 Walker 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