                              UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 11-7438


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

LUIS TEJEDA-RAMIREZ,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.    Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (6:06-cr-00393-HMH-1; 6:10-cv-70134-HMH)


Submitted:   March 19, 2012                 Decided:   March 27, 2012


Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Luis Tejeda-Ramirez, Appellant Pro Se.     Alan Lance Crick,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Luis     Tejeda-Ramirez         seeks      to     appeal    the     district

court’s order 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)

(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     Tejeda-Ramirez       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
