Case Name: Darriel MANER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Anthony PADULA, Warden Lee Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-06-25
Citations: 283 F. App'x 151
Docket Number: No. 08-6450
Parties: Darriel MANER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Anthony PADULA, Warden Lee Correctional Institution, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 283
Pages: 151–152

Head Matter:
Darriel MANER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Anthony PADULA, Warden Lee Correctional Institution, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 08-6450.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 19, 2008.
Decided: June 25, 2008.
Darriel Maner, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Darriel Maner seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). 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) (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, 537 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 Maner has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certifícate 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.