Case Name: Shawn Dupree CORPENING-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alvin W. KELLER; Reuben F. Young; Duane Terrell; Robert C. Lewis, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-03-29
Citations: 515 F. App'x 229
Docket Number: No. 12-7936
Parties: Shawn Dupree CORPENING-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alvin W. KELLER; Reuben F. Young; Duane Terrell; Robert C. Lewis, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 515
Pages: 229–229

Head Matter:
Shawn Dupree CORPENING-BEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Alvin W. KELLER; Reuben F. Young; Duane Terrell; Robert C. Lewis, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 12-7936.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 13, 2013.
Decided: March 29, 2013.
Shawn Dupree Corpening-Bey, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Shawn Dupree Corpening-Bey seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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 Corpening-Bey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility 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.