Case Name: Albert Lee STEVENSON, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-13
Citations: 306 F. App'x 815
Docket Number: No. 08-8208
Parties: Albert Lee STEVENSON, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 306
Pages: 815–816

Head Matter:
Albert Lee STEVENSON, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Butch JACKSON, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 08-8208.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 17, 2008.
Decided: Jan. 13, 2009.
Albert Lee Stevenson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Albert Lee Stevenson, 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 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 Stevenson 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.