Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Treadway Levon MANNING, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-03-15
Citations: 129 F. App'x 752
Docket Number: No. 05-6133
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Treadway Levon MANNING, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 129
Pages: 752–753

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Treadway Levon MANNING, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-6133.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 10, 2005.
Decided March 15, 2005.
Treadway Levon Manning, Appellant pro se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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.
Treadway Levon Manning seeks to appeal the district court's order denying as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appeal-able 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 his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings 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, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Manning has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Manning's motion for a certifícate 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