                             UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 10-6230


RUSSELL MONTGOMERY,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

MCKITHER BODISON,

                Respondent - Appellee.



Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville.    Henry M. Herlong Jr., Senior
District Judge. (6:09-cv-00778-HMH)


Submitted:   May 20, 2010                    Decided:   May 28, 2010


Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Russell Montgomery, Appellant Pro Se.       Donald John Zelenka,
Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, Assistant
Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

              Russell      Montgomery        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.                 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, 529 U.S. 473,

484    (2000);     see    Miller-El     v.    Cockrell,         537    U.S.       322,     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.                                   Slack,

529 U.S. at 484-85.             We have independently reviewed the record

and conclude that Montgomery 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
