Case Name: Darian Wayne PARKS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-11-23
Citations: 114 F. App'x 573
Docket Number: No. 04-6954
Parties: Darian Wayne PARKS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 114
Pages: 573–574

Head Matter:
Darian Wayne PARKS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bonnie BOYETTE, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 04-6954.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 29, 2004.
Decided Nov. 23, 2004.
Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., The Law Office of Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Darían Wayne Parks appeals a district court's order accepting a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny relief on Parks's 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Parks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Parks's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, 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