Case Name: Jonathan Glenn DOWDY, a/k/a Jonathan G. Dowdy, a/k/a Jonathan M. Dowdy, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-01-15
Citations: 306 F. App'x 824
Docket Number: No. 08-7176
Parties: Jonathan Glenn DOWDY, a/k/a Jonathan G. Dowdy, a/k/a Jonathan M. Dowdy, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 306
Pages: 824–825

Head Matter:
Jonathan Glenn DOWDY, a/k/a Jonathan G. Dowdy, a/k/a Jonathan M. Dowdy, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN BROAD RIVER CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 08-7176.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 13, 2009.
Decided: Jan. 15, 2009.
Jonathan Glenn Dowdy, Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Mabry, Columbia, South Carolina, Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, Judges, and TRAXLER and KING, Circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Jonathan Glenn Dowdy 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 (2000) petition. The 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 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 Dowdy 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.