Opinion
No. 15-6580
09-01-2015
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BRUCE KILGORE, Defendant - Appellant.
Bruce Kilgore, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Dorsey Collery, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., Lindsay Eyler Kaplan, Barbara Suzanne Skalla, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, Richard Charles Kay, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, Jonathan Allen Ophardt, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Roger W. Titus, Senior District Judge. (8:06-cr-00066-RWT-11; 8:12-cv-00557-RWT) Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bruce Kilgore, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Dorsey Collery, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., Lindsay Eyler Kaplan, Barbara Suzanne Skalla, Assistant United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, Richard Charles Kay, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, Jonathan Allen Ophardt, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Bruce Kilgore 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 Kilgore 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 before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED