Case Name: Demetrius JONES, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Kevin WENDT, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-10-18
Citations: 203 F. App'x 516
Docket Number: No. 06-6268
Parties: Demetrius JONES, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Kevin WENDT, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 203
Pages: 516–516

Head Matter:
Demetrius JONES, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Kevin WENDT, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 06-6268.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 4, 2006.
Decided: Oct. 18, 2006.
Demetrius Jones, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Betsy S. Jividen, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Ap-pellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Demetrius Jones, Jr., a prisoner in custody under a sentence imposed by a Superior Court of the District of Columbia, 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 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate 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 independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of ap-pealability, 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.