Case Name: William Jasper GOODMAN, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Lewis SMITH, Superintendent, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-18
Citations: 370 F. App'x 378
Docket Number: No. 09-8194
Parties: William Jasper GOODMAN, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Lewis SMITH, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before MICHAEL, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 370
Pages: 378–379

Head Matter:
William Jasper GOODMAN, Jr., Petitioner—Appellant, v. Lewis SMITH, Superintendent, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 09-8194.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 5, 2010.
Decided: March 18, 2010.
William Jasper Goodman, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Before MICHAEL, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William Jasper Goodman, Jr. seeks to appeal the district court's order 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. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appeal-ability 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 Goodman has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motions for a certificate of appealability and for appointment of counsel, and we 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.