Case Name: Rosser Lee BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-11
Citations: 205 F. App'x 150
Docket Number: No. 06-7021
Parties: Rosser Lee BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 205
Pages: 150–150

Head Matter:
Rosser Lee BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR, Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 06-7021.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 28, 2006.
Decided: Oct. 11, 2006.
Rosser Lee Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Rosser Lee Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appeal-ability. 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 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. 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 Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Brown leave to proceed in forma pauperis on 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.