Case Name: Jerry Lee COLLIER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina; Mr. Faulkenberry, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-07
Citations: 175 F. App'x 606
Docket Number: No. 05-7690
Parties: Jerry Lee COLLIER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina; Mr. Faulkenberry, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 175
Pages: 606–607

Head Matter:
Jerry Lee COLLIER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Henry Dargan McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina; Mr. Faulkenberry, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 05-7690.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 30, 2006.
Decided April 7, 2006.
Jerry Lee Collier, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Jerry Lee Collier seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the recom mendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are 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, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Collier 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.