Case Name: Tyrone Lorenzo ROBINSON, Petitioner - Appellant, v. WARDEN, RIDGELAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent - Appellee, and State of South Carolina, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-30
Citations: 329 F. App'x 506
Docket Number: No. 09-6715
Parties: Tyrone Lorenzo ROBINSON, Petitioner — Appellant, v. WARDEN, RIDGELAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent — Appellee, and State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 329
Pages: 506–506

Head Matter:
Tyrone Lorenzo ROBINSON, Petitioner — Appellant, v. WARDEN, RIDGELAND CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent — Appellee, and State of South Carolina, Respondent.
No. 09-6715.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2009.
Decided: July 30, 2009.
Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Lorenzo Robinson 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 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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 disposi-tive 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 Robinson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Robinson's motion for bail pending appeal. We also 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.