Case Name: James Jamal WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, MCCI, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2015-06-02
Citations: 605 F. App'x 196
Docket Number: No. 14-7867
Parties: James Jamal WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, MCCI, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 605
Pages: 196–196

Head Matter:
James Jamal WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, MCCI, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 14-7867.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 14, 2015.
Decided: June 2, 2015.
James Jamal Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Kaycie Smith Timmons, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, SC, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James Jamal Williams 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 (2012) 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) (2012). A certifícate of appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(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 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 Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauper-is, 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 prodess.
DISMISSED.