Case ID: f-appx_275/html/0258-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Oyama LEWIS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent—Appellee.
    No. 08-6068.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 24, 2008.
    Decided: April 29, 2008.
    Oyama Lewis, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
   PER CURIAM:

Oyama Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dis-positive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell, 587 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lewis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we deny Lewis’ motions for production of documents, to consolidate his appeal, and for an en banc hearing. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.