Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Wayne LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-08-02
Citations: 441 F. App'x 972
Docket Number: No. 11-6356
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Wayne LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 441
Pages: 972–972

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Wayne LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-6356.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2011.
Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.
Ronald Wayne Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Brandon Michael Santos, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Wayne Lewis seeks to appeal the district court's order denying in part his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2011) 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) (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 Lewis 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.
The court granted the § 2255 motion in part and entered an amended judgment reducing Lewis' supervised release term from five years to three years.