UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                              No. 11-7667


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

DANILO QUESADA-GUERRERO,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.  N. Carlton Tilley,
Jr., Senior District Judge.     (1:07-cr-00043-NCT-1; 1:10-cv-
00367-NCT-PTS)


Submitted:   April 26, 2012                 Decided:    April 30, 2012


Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Danilo Quesada-Guerrero, Appellant       Pro Se.       Michael   Francis
Joseph,   Angela  Hewlett  Miller,        Assistant     United    States
Attorneys.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Danilo Quesada-Guerrero seeks to appeal the district

court’s    order    accepting      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) (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, 

,

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 motion states a

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                           

.

            We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that    Quesada-Guerrero       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


                                             2
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.



                                                                   DISMISSED




                                    3