Case Name: Jacob Douglas PEYTON, IV, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Dept. of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-04-26
Citations: 472 F. App'x 251
Docket Number: No. 12-6202
Parties: Jacob Douglas PEYTON, IV, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Dept. of Corrections, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 472
Pages: 251–252

Head Matter:
Jacob Douglas PEYTON, IV, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director, Dept. of Corrections, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 12-6202.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: April 19, 2012.
Decided: April 26, 2012.
Jacob Douglas Peyton, IV, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jacob Douglas Peyton, IV, seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as untimely filed. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court's assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the distinct court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Peyton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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.