Case Name: Thomas LOWERY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SC DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; Cecilia Reynolds, Warden Ker. CI, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-01-11
Citations: 461 F. App'x 325
Docket Number: No. 11-7349
Parties: Thomas LOWERY, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SC DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; Cecilia Reynolds, Warden Ker. CI, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 461
Pages: 325–325

Head Matter:
Thomas LOWERY, Petitioner—Appellant, v. SC DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION PAROLE AND PARDON SERVICES; Cecilia Reynolds, Warden Ker. CI, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 11-7349.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 9, 2012.
Decided: Jan. 11, 2012.
Thomas Lowery, Appellant Pro Se. Tommy Evans, Jr., South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole & Pardon Services, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appel-lees.
Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Lowery, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.2011) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lowery has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Lowery'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.