Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnnie Elvin McKELVEY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-22
Citations: 357 F. App'x 537
Docket Number: No. 09-7943
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnnie Elvin McKELVEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 357
Pages: 537–538

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnnie Elvin McKELVEY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 09-7943.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 15, 2009.
Decided: Dec. 22, 2009.
Johnnie Elvin McKelvey, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Nicholas Bianchi, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Johnnie Elvin McKelvey seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitution al 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, 484-85, 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 McKelvey 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.