Case Name: Gregory Leon YOUNG, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Loretta K. KELLY, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-11-14
Citations: 253 F. App'x 290
Docket Number: No. 07-7122
Parties: Gregory Leon YOUNG, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Loretta K. KELLY, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 253
Pages: 290–291

Head Matter:
Gregory Leon YOUNG, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Loretta K. KELLY, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 07-7122.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 17, 2007.
Decided: Nov. 14, 2007.
Gregory Leon Young, Appellant Pro Se. Denise Colette Anderson, Office of the At torney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Gregory Leon Young seeks to appeal the disti'ict court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (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 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 dispositive 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 Young 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.