Case Name: Jackie Jermaine BARTLETT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel A. BRAXTON, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-01
Citations: 204 F. App'x 305
Docket Number: No. 06-7146
Parties: Jackie Jermaine BARTLETT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel A. BRAXTON, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 204
Pages: 305–306

Head Matter:
Jackie Jermaine BARTLETT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Daniel A. BRAXTON, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 06-7146.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 29, 2006.
Decided: Nov. 1, 2006.
Jackie Jermaine Bartlett, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jackie Jermaine Bartlett seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing 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 ap pealability. 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. 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 Bartlett 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.