Case Name: Oswald Hosea O'NEAL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-07
Citations: 328 F. App'x 283
Docket Number: No. 09-6015
Parties: Oswald Hosea O’NEAL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 283–284

Head Matter:
Oswald Hosea O’NEAL, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 09-6015.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 2, 2009.
Decided: July 7, 2009.
Oswald Hosea O’Neal, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry, South Carolina Attorney General’s Office, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Ap-pellee.
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Oswald Hosea O'Neal, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 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 appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2258(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 O'Neal 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.