Case Name: Joseph Lee GARDNER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee, and State of North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-01
Citations: 215 F. App'x 200
Docket Number: No. 06-7633
Parties: Joseph Lee GARDNER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee, and State of North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 215
Pages: 200–200

Head Matter:
Joseph Lee GARDNER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee, and State of North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent.
No. 06-7633.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 22, 2007.
Decided: Feb. 1, 2007.
• Joseph Lee Gardner, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Joseph Lee Gardner seeks to appeal the district 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 appeal-ability. 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 Gardner 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.