Case Name: Willie Walter BUTLER, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Director Va. Dept. of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-06-01
Citations: 183 F. App'x 378
Docket Number: No. 06-6421
Parties: Willie Walter BUTLER, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Director Va. Dept. of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 183
Pages: 378–378

Head Matter:
Willie Walter BUTLER, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Director Va. Dept. of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 06-6421.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 18, 2006.
Decided: June 1, 2006.
Willie Walter Butler, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Willie Walter Butler, 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 (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 Butler has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Butler's motion for 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.