Case Name: Aaron James BRENNAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. WOODSON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-08
Citations: 584 F. App'x 147
Docket Number: No. 14-6800
Parties: Aaron James BRENNAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. WOODSON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before KING and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 584
Pages: 147–148

Head Matter:
Aaron James BRENNAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J. WOODSON, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 14-6800.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 18, 2014.
Decided: Oct. 8, 2014.
Aaron James Brennan, Appellant Pro Se, Susan Mozley Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Ap-pellee.
Before KING and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Aaron James Brennan seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). 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) (2012). 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Brennan has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Brennan's motion for a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.