UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7690
TONY HESTER VINSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
LAFAYETTE HALL,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (1:05-cv-00701-JAB)
Submitted: February 22, 2007 Decided: March 2, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Tony Hester Vinson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tony Hester Vinson 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 Vinson has not
made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant
Vinson’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his motion
for 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 -