Case Name: Marcus FASHAW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jon OZMINT, SCDC; State of South Carolina; McKither Bodison, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-21
Citations: 357 F. App'x 531
Docket Number: No. 09-7559
Parties: Marcus FASHAW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jon OZMINT, SCDC; State of South Carolina; McKither Bodison, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 357
Pages: 531–531

Head Matter:
Marcus FASHAW, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jon OZMINT, SCDC; State of South Carolina; McKither Bodison, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 09-7559.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dee. 15, 2009.
Decided: Dec. 21, 2009.
Marcus Fashaw, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Marcus Fashaw seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate 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 Fashaw 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.