Case Name: Neapoleon Juan FREEMAN, Pharaoh, Diplomat, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Division of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-06
Citations: 145 F. App'x 416
Docket Number: No. 05-6541
Parties: Neapoleon Juan FREEMAN, Pharaoh, Diplomat, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Division of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 145
Pages: 416–417

Head Matter:
Neapoleon Juan FREEMAN, Pharaoh, Diplomat, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Division of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 05-6541.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 29, 2005.
Decided Oct. 6, 2005.
Neapoleon Juan Freeman, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, 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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Neapoleon Juan Freeman seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing without prejudice, his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely. This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural findings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Freeman 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