Court Opinion

ID: 1020691
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 22:55:03.326228+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:05:39.617304
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 05-7742

RODNEY EUGENE NAGYE,

                                                Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

EVELYN    SEIFERT,    Warden,      Mount      Olive
Correctional Complex,

                                                 Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Beckley.  David A. Faber, Chief
District Judge. (CA-04-710-5)

Submitted:   August 23, 2006                 Decided:   October 11, 2006

Before WILLIAMS, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney Eugene Nagye, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, Robert
David Goldberg, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

           Rodney Eugene Nagye 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 (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 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).          We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Nagye 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

                                 - 2 -