Case Name: Anthony Keith COOPER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-06
Citations: 150 F. App'x 229
Docket Number: No. 05-6626
Parties: Anthony Keith COOPER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 150
Pages: 229–230

Head Matter:
Anthony Keith COOPER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 05-6626.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2005.
Decided: Oct. 6, 2005.
Anthony Keith Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Keith Cooper seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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 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 rea sonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Cooper 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