Case Name: Corey Christopher MERCER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William SONDERVAN, Commissioner; Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-01-28
Citations: 86 F. App'x 573
Docket Number: No. 03-7630
Parties: Corey Christopher MERCER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. William SONDERVAN, Commissioner; Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 86
Pages: 573–574

Head Matter:
Corey Christopher MERCER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. William SONDERVAN, Commissioner; Attorney General for the State of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 03-7630.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 15, 2004.
Decided Jan. 28, 2004.
Corey Christopher Mercer, Appellant pro se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Corey Christopher Mercer appeals from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition by the district court. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit judge or justice issues a certificate of appealability. 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 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 (4th Cir.2001).
We have reviewed the record and determine that Mercer has not made the requisite showing. See Miller-El, 537 U.S. at 336. 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 in the decisional process.
DISMISSED