UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-6733
WAKEEL ABDUL-SABUR,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
HAROLD CLARKE, Director,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior
District Judge. (7:14-cv-00147-JCT-RSB)
Submitted: June 26, 2014 Decided: June 30, 2014
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wakeel Abdul-Sabur, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Wakeel Abdul-Sabur seeks to appeal the district
court’s order dismissing as successive 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).
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
petition 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 Abdul-Sabur 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