Case Name: Tyrone HOLLEY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-28
Citations: 231 F. App'x 273
Docket Number: No. 07-6316
Parties: Tyrone HOLLEY, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 231
Pages: 273–273

Head Matter:
Tyrone HOLLEY, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 07-6316.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 21, 2007.
Decided: June 28, 2007.
Tyrone Holley, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Holley seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as a successive petition for which authorization had not been granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (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 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 Holley 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.