Case ID: f-appx_104/html/0346-01.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

Michael Ellery TORY, Sr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Jack LEE, Warden, Keen Mountain Correctional Center, Respondent—Appellee.
    No. 04-6178.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted June 18, 2004.
    Decided Aug. 17, 2004.
    Michael Ellery Tory, Sr., Appellant pro se. John H. McLees, Jr., Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Michael Ellery Tory, Sr., appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition by the magistrate judge. An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding 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 jurists of reason would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 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 (4th Cir.2001).

We have reviewed the record and conclude that Tory has not made the requisite showing. We therefore 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED