
    John Wesley LEE, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. John Joseph CURRAN, Jr., the Attorney General of the State of Maryland; Jon P. Galley, Warden; Warden Bobby Shearin, Respondents-Appellees. John Wesley Lee, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. John Joseph Curran, Jr., the Attorney General of the State of Maryland; Jon P. Galley, Warden; Warden Bobby Shearin, Respondents-Appellees.
    Nos. 08-8549, 09-6126.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 16, 2009.
    Decided: July 10, 2009.
    John Wesley Lee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, for Appellees.
    Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   No. 08-8549 dismissed; No. 09-6126 affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John Wesley Lee, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. He also appeals the district court’s dismissal of his motion for injunctive relief. We deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal in No. 08-8549 and affirm the district court in No. 09-6126.

As to No. 08-8549, the district court’s order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(2) (2006). 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. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lee has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeala-bility and dismiss the appeal.

As to No. 09-6126, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Lee v. Shearin, No. 8:00-cv-03323-CCB (D.Md. Dec. 11, 2008). 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.

No. 08-8549 DISMISSED

No. 09-6126 AFFIRMED  