Opinion
No. 13-6649
12-03-2013
ROGER LEE BOWERS, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, v. DAVID BALLARD, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
Roger Lee Bowers, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Christopher S. Dodrill, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (2:11-cv-00073-JPB-DJJ) Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Lee Bowers, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Christopher S. Dodrill, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Roger Lee Bowers, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation 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. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006); Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bowers has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED