UNPUBLISHED

                  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                      FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 13-6217


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                Plaintiff - Appellee,

          v.

CORY GETON JOHNSON, a/k/a Corey Geton Johnson,

                Defendant - Appellant.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:10-cr-00271-MOC-DCK-1; 3:12-cv-00641-MOC)


Submitted:   June 27, 2013                 Decided:   July 10, 2013


Before KEENAN, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Cory Geton Johnson, Appellant Pro Se.       William A. Brafford,
Cortney Escaravage, Melissa Louise Rikard, Assistant United
States Attorneys, Kevin Zolot, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

            Cory     Geton      Johnson      seeks      to      appeal    the     district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West

Supp.    2013)    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 Johnson 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