Case Name: David M. McCLURE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Commissioner Ozmint, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-01-04
Citations: 261 F. App'x 454
Docket Number: No. 07-7004
Parties: David M. McCLURE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Commissioner Ozmint, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 261
Pages: 454–454

Head Matter:
David M. McCLURE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Commissioner Ozmint, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 07-7004.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 30, 2007.
Decided: Jan. 4, 2008.
Jeffrey P. Bloom, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Donald John Zelenka, South Carolina Attorney General’s Office, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
David M. McClure, Jr., 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 (2000) 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) (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 McClure 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.