Case Name: Michael Alexander BETHEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Director, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-10-31
Citations: 452 F. App'x 391
Docket Number: No. 11-6980
Parties: Michael Alexander BETHEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Director, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 452
Pages: 391–392

Head Matter:
Michael Alexander BETHEA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Director, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 11-6980.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 11, 2011.
Decided: Oct. 31, 2011.
Michael Alexander Bethea, Appellant Pro Se. Robert H. Anderson, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Alexander Bethea seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's final order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bethea 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.
Bethea consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the magistrate judge, as permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2006).