Thomas Lowery v. GARY D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7570
THOMAS LOWERY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
GARY D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC; CHARLES
CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South
Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(CA-02-3205-25BC-3)
Submitted: December 18, 2003 Decided: January 16, 2004
Before LUTTIG, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas Lowery, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy
Attorney General, Derrick K. McFarland, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 1 of 2 --

- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Thomas Lowery seeks to appeal the district court’s order
adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant the
Government summary judgment and deny his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)
petition. Lowery cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge
or justice issues a certificate of appealability, and 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 habeas appellant meets 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, 326 (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 Lowery 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 of 2 --