Case Name: Manolo ALEGRIA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. HAYNES, Respondent-Appellee, and Gary Locklear, Judge, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-07-16
Citations: 388 F. App'x 289
Docket Number: No. 10-6277
Parties: Manolo ALEGRIA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. HAYNES, Respondent-Appellee, and Gary Locklear, Judge, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 388
Pages: 289–290

Head Matter:
Manolo ALEGRIA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. HAYNES, Respondent-Appellee, and Gary Locklear, Judge, Respondent.
No. 10-6277.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 21, 2010.
Decided: July 16, 2010.
Manolo Alegria-Sanchez, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Manolo Alegria-Sanchez seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 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) (2006). 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. 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 Aleg-ria-Sanchez 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.