Case Name: Marion Leon BEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Director Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-03-06
Citations: 315 F. App'x 445
Docket Number: No. 08-8141
Parties: Marion Leon BEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Director Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 315
Pages: 445–446

Head Matter:
Marion Leon BEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Director Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 08-8141.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 26, 2009.
Decided: March 6, 2009.
Marion Leon Bea, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marion Leon Bea seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir.2004). 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) (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 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 Bea 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.