Case Name: Derrian LaTroyce SPANN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stan BURTT, Warden, Respondent-Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-02-26
Citations: 266 F. App'x 301
Docket Number: No. 07-7619
Parties: Derrian LaTroyce SPANN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Stan BURTT, Warden, Respondent—Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondent.
Judges: Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 266
Pages: 301–301

Head Matter:
Derrian LaTroyce SPANN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Stan BURTT, Warden, Respondent—Appellee, and Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondent.
No. 07-7619.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 21, 2008.
Decided: Feb. 26, 2008.
Derrian LaTroyce Spann, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters, Donald John Zelenka, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Derrian LaTroyce Spann seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) 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) (2000). 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 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 Spann 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.