Case Name: Tyrone Lamar ROBERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, Warden of McCormick Corrections Institution of SC Dept of Corrections; Alan Wilson, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-22
Citations: 466 F. App'x 213
Docket Number: No. 11-7502
Parties: Tyrone Lamar ROBERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, Warden of McCormick Corrections Institution of SC Dept. of Corrections; Alan Wilson, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 466
Pages: 213–214

Head Matter:
Tyrone Lamar ROBERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Leroy CARTLEDGE, Warden of McCormick Corrections Institution of SC Dept. of Corrections; Alan Wilson, Attorney General of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 11-7502.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 16, 2012.
Decided: Feb. 22, 2012.
Tyrone Lamar Roberson, Appellant Pro Se.
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Lamar Roberson seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(e)(2) (2006). 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 Roberson 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.