UNPUBLISHED

                       UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                                      No. 20-6761


MICHAEL STEVEN OWLFEATHER-GORBEY,

                    Petitioner - Appellant,

             v.

WARDEN, FCI Cumberland,

                    Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Richard D. Bennett, District Judge. (1:19-cv-02394-RDB)


Submitted: September 24, 2020                               Decided: September 29, 2020


Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit
Judge.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Michael Steven Owlfeather-Gorbey, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

       Michael Steven Owlfeather-Gorbey, a District of Columbia offender, seeks to

appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition challenging

the constitutionality of his prison disciplinary proceedings. The order is not appealable

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. ∗       28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A). 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). When the district court

denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that

reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims

debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 

, 773-74 (2017). 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. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 

, 140-41 (2012) (citing

Slack v. McDaniel, 

, 484 (2000)).

       We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Owlfeather-Gorbey

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




       ∗
         Because Owlfeather-Gorbey was convicted in a District of Columbia court, he is
required to obtain a certificate of appealability in order to appeal the denial of his habeas
petition. See Madley v. United States Parole Comm’n, 

, 1310 (D.C. Cir.
2002).

                                             2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

                                                                             DISMISSED




                                            3