Case Name: Samyeil Bernard BARBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-04-03
Citations: 564 F. App'x 735
Docket Number: No. 13-7705
Parties: Samyeil Bernard BARBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before SHEDD and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 564
Pages: 735–735

Head Matter:
Samyeil Bernard BARBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 13-7705.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 31, 2014.
Decided: April 3, 2014.
Samyeil Bernard Barber, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Brendan McDonald, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appel-lee.
Before SHEDD and THACKER, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Samyeil Bernard Barber 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 (2012) 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)(A) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Barber has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.