UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 13-7847


ANGEL ALFONSO CHIRINOS-ESCALA,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

HAROLD CLARKE, Virginia Department of Corrections,

                Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.    Anthony John Trenga,
District Judge. (1:13-cv-00716-AJT-TRJ)


Submitted:   March 11, 2014                 Decided:   March 28, 2014


Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Angel Alfonso Chirinos-Escala, Appellant Pro Se.         Lauren
Catherine Campbell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Angel      Alfonso      Chirinos-Escala            seeks    to    appeal     the

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2012) petition.           The order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice    or    judge     issues     a   certificate         of    appealability.       28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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, 

,

484    (2000);   see       Miller-El      v.    Cockrell,      

,     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 petition states a

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                              

.

            We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that    Chirinos-Escala         has       not       made    the     requisite     showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave

to    proceed    in    forma    pauperis,           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