Case Name: Roberta MOORE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA; Forsyth County, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-11-29
Citations: 256 F. App'x 601
Docket Number: No. 07-7243
Parties: Roberta MOORE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA; Forsyth County, Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 256
Pages: 601–602

Head Matter:
Roberta MOORE, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA; Forsyth County, Defendants—Appellees.
No. 07-7243.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 20, 2007.
Decided: Nov. 29, 2007.
Roberta Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Roberta Moore seeks to appeal the magistrate judge's order dismissing as untimely her 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 Moore 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.
The parties consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2000).