UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6767
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL T. MCGEE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:13-cr-00023-FPS-RWT-1;
5:16-cv-00102-FPS-RWT)
Submitted: October 17, 2019 Decided: October 22, 2019
Before MOTZ and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael T. McGee, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael T. McGee seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The district court’s order is not appealable unless a circuit
justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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, 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 motion 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 McGee 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 contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
DISMISSED
2