
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alejandro Salinas GARCIA, a/k/a Alex, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-7890
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 29, 2016
    Decided: June 7, 2016
    
      Dallas Craig Hughes, Law Offices of D. Craig Hughes, Houston, Texas, for Appellant. Thomas Richard Ascik, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina; Steven R. Kaufman, William Michael Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
    Before DUNCAN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alejandro Salinas Garcia seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion.- The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 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 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 motion 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 Garcia has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we' deny his motion for 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  