Case Name: Norman Leroy LAYNE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Vanessa P. ADAMS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-03-28
Citations: 271 F. App'x 363
Docket Number: No. 07-7729
Parties: Norman Leroy LAYNE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Vanessa P. ADAMS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 271
Pages: 363–364

Head Matter:
Norman Leroy LAYNE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Vanessa P. ADAMS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 07-7729.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 25, 2008.
Decided: March 28, 2008.
Norman Leroy Layne, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Norman Leroy Layne seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition for failure to comply with a district court order. The order is not ap-pealable 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 any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dis-positive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. 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 Layne 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.