Case Name: Harvey P. SHORT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William M. FOX, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-09-03
Citations: 393 F. App'x 992
Docket Number: No. 10-6729
Parties: Harvey P. SHORT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William M. FOX, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 393
Pages: 992–992

Head Matter:
Harvey P. SHORT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William M. FOX, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 10-6729.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 26, 2010.
Decided: Sept. 3, 2010.
Harvey P. Short, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Harvey P. Short seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief without prejudice on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition for failure to exhaust state court remedies. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate 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 Short has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability and dismiss the appeal. Short's motion to compel the state court to adjudicate his state habeas corpus petition is denied. 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.