Thomas Dorsey v. Stan Burtt

Filing 920090120

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8054

THOMAS DORSEY, Petitioner ­ Appellant, v. STAN BURTT, Warden, Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondent ­ Appellee, and HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General, Respondent.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (8:07-cv-01865-HFF)

Submitted:

January 13, 2009

Decided:

January 20, 2009

Before WILLIAMS, Judges.

Chief

Judge,

and

TRAXLER

and

KING,

Circuit

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Dorsey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Thomas Dorsey 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 appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). will not issue absent "a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. by § 2253(c)(2) (2006). that A prisoner satisfies would this find

standard

demonstrating

reasonable

jurists

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). conclude that We have independently reviewed the record and Dorsey 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