Case Name: Anthony KELLY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHEARIN, Warden; Attorney General's Office, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-09
Citations: 369 F. App'x 447
Docket Number: No. 09-8154
Parties: Anthony KELLY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHEARIN, Warden; Attorney General’s Office, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 369
Pages: 447–447

Head Matter:
Anthony KELLY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby SHEARIN, Warden; Attorney General’s Office, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 09-8154.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 25, 2010.
Decided: March 9, 2010.
Anthony Kelly, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Kelly seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(e)(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). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. 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, 683-54 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Kelly has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility, deny Kelly's renewed motion for release pending appeal and his motion to schedule oral argument, 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.