Case Name: Charles Emory LEWIS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lisa M. EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-18
Citations: 104 F. App'x 363
Docket Number: No. 04-6444
Parties: Charles Emory LEWIS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lisa M. EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 104
Pages: 363–363

Head Matter:
Charles Emory LEWIS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lisa M. EDWARDS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-6444.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2004.
Decided: Aug. 18, 2004.
Charles Emory Lewis, Jr., Appellant pro se.
Steven Andrew Witmer, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Charles Emory Lewis, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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 ap-pealability 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 Lewis 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