                            UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                            No. 15-7171


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                      Plaintiff – Appellee,

          v.

CHRISTOPHER MYERS,

                      Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge.
(8:11-cr-00614-RWT-1; 8:14-cv-02428-RWT)


Submitted:   January 14, 2016             Decided:   January 19, 2016


Before AGEE, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Christopher Myers, Appellant Pro Se. Kristi Noel O’Malley,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for
Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

      Christopher          Myers    seeks    to       appeal     the     district        court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 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)

(2012).     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) (2012).                      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

Myers 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




                                                2
contentions   are   adequately   presented   in   the   materials   before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.



                                                               DISMISSED




                                   3
