Case Name: Cleveland SANDERS, III, a/k/a Skip, Petitioner-Appellant, v. MANNING CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Warden, Respondent-Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-06
Citations: 340 F. App'x 845
Docket Number: No. 09-6203
Parties: Cleveland SANDERS, III, a/k/a Skip, Petitioner-Appellant, v. MANNING CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Warden, Respondent-Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 340
Pages: 845–846

Head Matter:
Cleveland SANDERS, III, a/k/a Skip, Petitioner-Appellant, v. MANNING CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Warden, Respondent-Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-6203.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 28, 2009.
Decided: Oct. 6, 2009.
Cleveland Sanders, III, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cleveland Sanders, III, 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 appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability 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 Sanders 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 be fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.