Case Name: Paul Leslie COX, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Wayne C. McCABE, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee, and Jon E. Ozmint, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-05-30
Citations: 473 F. App'x 274
Docket Number: No. 12-6134
Parties: Paul Leslie COX, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Wayne C. McCABE, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee, and Jon E. Ozmint, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 473
Pages: 274–274

Head Matter:
Paul Leslie COX, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Wayne C. McCABE, Warden of Lieber Correctional Institution, Respondent-Appellee, and Jon E. Ozmint, Defendant.
No. 12-6134.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 24, 2012.
Decided: May 30, 2012.
Paul Leslie Cox, Appellant pro se.
Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Paul Leslie Cox seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing as untimely 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)(A) (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, 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 Cox has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Cox's motion for appointment of counsel, 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.