UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-7189

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LAMONT NICHOLAS RIDDICK,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (2:14-cr-00005-BO-1; 2:17-cv- 00024-BO)

Submitted: December 20, 2018 Decided: December 27, 2018

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

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lamont Nicholas Riddick, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

Lamont Nicholas Riddick seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the

Government’s motion to dismiss and dismissing Riddick’s

(2012)

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of

appealability.

(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

(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,

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell,

(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,

.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Riddick 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