United States v. Artis Slade , 446 F. App'x 584 ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6916
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ARTIS EUGENE SLADE,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (1:07-cr-00324-JAB-1; 1:10-cv-00574-JAB-
PTS)
Submitted: September 13, 2011 Decided: September 16, 2011
Before AGEE, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Artis Eugene Slade, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Artis Eugene Slade seeks to appeal the district
court’s order adopting the recommendation of the magistrate
judge and denying relief on his 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 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).
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 Slade 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
2
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
3