Case Name: Aaron S. PRETTY, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent of Mountain View Correctional Institution; State of North Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-06-25
Citations: 327 F. App'x 412
Docket Number: No. 09-6758
Parties: Aaron S. PRETTY, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent of Mountain View Correctional Institution; State of North Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 327
Pages: 412–413

Head Matter:
Aaron S. PRETTY, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. David MITCHELL, Superintendent of Mountain View Correctional Institution; State of North Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 09-6758.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 18, 2009.
Decided: June 25, 2009.
Aaron S. Pretty, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Aaron S. Petty, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing "without prejudice his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as successive. 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). 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 that Pretty has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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.