Case Name: Preston D. JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael MCCALL; Henry D. McMaster, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-03-07
Citations: 415 F. App'x 512
Docket Number: No. 10-6756
Parties: Preston D. JOHNSON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Michael MCCALL; Henry D. McMaster, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 415
Pages: 512–513

Head Matter:
Preston D. JOHNSON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Michael MCCALL; Henry D. McMaster, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 10-6756.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 28, 2011.
Decided: March 7, 2011.
Preston D. Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Depu ty Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Preston D. Johnson seeks to appeal the district court's orders accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition, and denying reconsideration of that order. The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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). 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 Preston 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.