Rogers v. McMaster , 115 F. App'x 156 ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7707
HAYWARD LEON ROGERS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General of South
Carolina,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (CA-
03-3050-8-26BI)
Submitted: December 9, 2004 Decided: December 17, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Hayward Leon Rogers, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Hayward L. Rogers seeks to appeal the district court’s
order adopting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge
and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as
premature. An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a
§ 2254 proceeding 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 his
constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive
procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or
wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d
676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the
record and conclude that Rogers 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 -