Case Name: Keith Leonardo SHROPSHIRE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Renoice STANCIL, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-08-13
Citations: 538 F. App'x 241
Docket Number: No. 13-6343
Parties: Keith Leonardo SHROPSHIRE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Renoice STANCIL, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 538
Pages: 241–242

Head Matter:
Keith Leonardo SHROPSHIRE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Renoice STANCIL, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 13-6343.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 23, 2013.
Decided: Aug. 13, 2013.
Keith Leonardo Shropshire, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Keith Leonardo Shropshire seeks to appeal the district court's order denying re lief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1)(A) (2006). 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) (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 Shropshire has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, 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.