Price v. Warden, Perry Correctional Institution , 285 F. App'x 108 ( 2008 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6327
DRYNE PRICE,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN, PERRY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
JON OZMINT, Director,
Respondent.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. David C. Norton, Chief District
Judge. (8:07-cv-00386-DCN)
Submitted: July 15, 2008 Decided: July 29, 2008
Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dryne Price, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant
Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney
General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Dryne Price 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 Price 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
- 3 -