Case Name: Joseph Eugene HOOVER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-08-16
Citations: 475 F. App'x 912
Docket Number: No. 12-6695
Parties: Joseph Eugene HOOVER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 912–912

Head Matter:
Joseph Eugene HOOVER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 12-6695.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 10, 2012.
Decided: Aug. 16, 2012.
Joseph Eugene Hoover, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Eugene Hoover seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certifícate 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 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 Hoover has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Hoover's motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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.