Case Name: Curtis Wilford BELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. EDGEFIELD COUNTY, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-07
Citations: 268 F. App'x 267
Docket Number: No. 07-7525
Parties: Curtis Wilford BELL, Petitioner— Appellant, v. EDGEFIELD COUNTY, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 268
Pages: 267–268

Head Matter:
Curtis Wilford BELL, Petitioner— Appellant, v. EDGEFIELD COUNTY, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 07-7525.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2008.
Decided: March 7, 2008.
Curtis Wilford Bell, Appellant Pro Se.
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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Curtis Wilford Bell, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (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 certifi cate 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 Bell 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.