Case Name: Emory Alvin MICHAU, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. Al CANNON; State of South Carolina; Henry McMaster, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-05-02
Citations: 127 F. App'x 111
Docket Number: No. 04-7727
Parties: Emory Alvin MICHAU, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. J. Al CANNON; State of South Carolina; Henry McMaster, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 127
Pages: 111–111

Head Matter:
Emory Alvin MICHAU, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. J. Al CANNON; State of South Carolina; Henry McMaster, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 04-7727.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 30, 2005.
Decided May 2, 2005.
Emory Alvin Michau, Jr., Appellant pro se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.
Emory Alvin Michau, Jr., a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) for failure to exhaust state court remedies. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge 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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 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 Michau 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