Case Name: Steve Allen SPROUSE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General, NC, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-01-10
Citations: 212 F. App'x 234
Docket Number: No. 06-7514
Parties: Steve Allen SPROUSE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General, NC, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 212
Pages: 234–235

Head Matter:
Steve Allen SPROUSE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent; Roy Cooper, Attorney General, NC, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 06-7514.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 15, 2006.
Decided: Jan. 10, 2007.
Steve Allen Sprouse, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Steve Allen Sprouse seeks to appeal the district court's order and judgment denying relief on 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)(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 dispositive 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 Sprouse 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 be fore the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.