Case Name: Juan M. GORDON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-05-26
Citations: 325 F. App'x 223
Docket Number: No. 08-8556
Parties: Juan M. GORDON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 325
Pages: 223–223

Head Matter:
Juan M. GORDON, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 08-8556.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 15, 2009.
Decided: May 26, 2009.
Juan M. Gordon, Appellant Pro Se.
Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Juan M. Gordon seeks to appeal the district court's order 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 ap-pealability. 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). 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 Gordon has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Gordon's motion for transcript at government expense. 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.