Case Name: Gold Leroy BASS, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Bobby P. SHEARIN, Warden, Western Correctional Institution; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-04
Citations: 381 F. App'x 266
Docket Number: No. 09-7923
Parties: Gold Leroy BASS, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bobby P. SHEARIN, Warden, Western Correctional Institution; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 381
Pages: 266–267

Head Matter:
Gold Leroy BASS, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Bobby P. SHEARIN, Warden, Western Correctional Institution; Attorney General of Maryland, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 09-7923.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 1, 2010.
Decided: June 4, 2010.
Frank M. Dunbaugh, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellant. Edward John Kelley, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gold Leroy Bass, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as successive and untimely. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 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. § 2258(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. See 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 Bass has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Bass' motion to accelerate case processing, 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.