Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Dwayne TERRY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-03-19
Citations: 469 F. App'x 278
Docket Number: No. 11-7514
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Dwayne TERRY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 469
Pages: 278–279

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony Dwayne TERRY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-7514.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 15, 2012.
Decided: March 19, 2012.
Anthony Dwayne Terry, Appellant Pro Se. Patrick Friel Stokes, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Appellee.
Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Dwayne Terry seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely and unauthorized his successive 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 ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 Terry has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Terry's motion for 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.