Case Name: Robert Joseph SLAVEK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George HINKLE, Warden Greensville Correctional Center, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-24
Citations: 169 F. App'x 753
Docket Number: No. 05-6433
Parties: Robert Joseph SLAVEK, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George HINKLE, Warden Greensville Correctional Center, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 169
Pages: 753–753

Head Matter:
Robert Joseph SLAVEK, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George HINKLE, Warden Greensville Correctional Center, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 05-6433.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 28, 2005.
Decided: Feb. 24, 2006.
Robert Joseph Slavek, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Robert Joseph Slavek 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 both that the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. 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 Slavek has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Slavek's motion for 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.