Case Name: Tyrone WEST, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. Michael STOUFFER, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-03-02
Citations: 172 F. App'x 502
Docket Number: No. 05-7220
Parties: Tyrone WEST, Petitioner—Appellant, v. J. Michael STOUFFER, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 172
Pages: 502–503

Head Matter:
Tyrone WEST, Petitioner—Appellant, v. J. Michael STOUFFER, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 05-7220.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 22, 2006.
Decided: March 2, 2006.
Tyrone West, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone West seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See 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 West 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.