
    Mohammed Nasser JILANI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA; Donnie Harrison, Warden Wake County Detention Public Safety Center, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 16-6237
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 7, 2016
    Decided: June 17, 2016
    Mohammed Nasser Jilani, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
   Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Mohammed Nasser Jilani, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate 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. § 2258(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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U,S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jilani has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny the motions for bail and for appointment of counsel, 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.  