Case Name: Johnnie PETTAWAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Governor; Attorney General; Commonwealth Attorney's Office of the City of Newport News, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-10-27
Citations: 348 F. App'x 894
Docket Number: No. 09-7215
Parties: Johnnie PETTAWAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Governor; Attorney General; Commonwealth Attorney’s Office of the City of Newport News, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 348
Pages: 894–894

Head Matter:
Johnnie PETTAWAY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Commonwealth of VIRGINIA; Governor; Attorney General; Commonwealth Attorney’s Office of the City of Newport News, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 09-7215.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 20, 2009.
Decided: Oct. 27, 2009.
Johnnie Pettaway, Appellant Pro Se.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Johnnie Pettaway seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as successive 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 Petta-way has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability 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.