UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 10-6646


LAVANZA C. MACK,

                Petitioner – Appellant,

          v.

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; RAYMOND REED, Warden of the Manning
Correctional Institution,

                Respondents – Appellees.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.   Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(4:09-cv-00275-TLW)


Submitted:   November 18, 2010             Decided:   November 30, 2010


Before SHEDD and    AGEE,   Circuit   Judges,   and   HAMILTON,   Senior
Circuit Judge.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Lavanza C. Mack, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., OFFICE OF THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellees.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

               Lavanza C. Mack 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.            See    28   U.S.C.      § 2253(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. § 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,     

,    484

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 

, 336-38 (2003).

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable

claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                           

.         We    have     independently         reviewed      the    record    and

conclude       that        Mack    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



                                                2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED




                                    3