Court Opinion

ID: 206243
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-03-08 21:38:36+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:51.214025
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 10-7123

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

GERALD GRAY,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.      Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:06-cr-00165-BO-1; 5:10-cv-00139-BO)

Submitted:   February 28, 2011            Decided:   March 8, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gerald Gray, Appellant Pro Se.    Joshua Bryan Royster, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,       Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Gerald Gray seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying    relief        on    his    28   U.S.C.A.         § 2255    (West    Supp.     2010)

motion.    The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge     issues     a        certificate        of    appealability.            28     U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (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    (2000);     see    Miller-El        v.    Cockrell,      537    U.S.    322,     336-38

(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.              We have independently reviewed the record

and    conclude     that       Gray    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

                                                 2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED

                                    3