Case Name: Kelvin SELLERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-08-15
Citations: 235 F. App'x 151
Docket Number: No. 07-6435
Parties: Kelvin SELLERS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 235
Pages: 151–151

Head Matter:
Kelvin SELLERS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 07-6435.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 25, 2007.
Decided: Aug. 15, 2007.
Kelvin Sellers, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Kelvin Sellers 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 certifícate 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 Sellers 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.