Court Opinion

ID: 219071
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-06-17 18:42:21+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:39.232577
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                            No. 11-6258

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

MELVIN PAUL GARRIS,

                Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.     Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (4:06-cr-00016-FL-1; 4:09-cv-00093-FL)

Submitted:   June 9, 2011                 Decided:   June 17, 2011

Before KING, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Melvin Paul Garris, Appellant Pro Se. Joe Delbert Baker, II,
MARINE CORPS BASE, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina; Seth Morgan
Wood, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Melvin       Paul    Garris       seeks       to    appeal           the     district

court’s    order    accepting      the       recommendation           of    the        magistrate

judge and 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)(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    (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 Garris 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