Case Name: Joe Franklin SANDERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-30
Citations: 279 F. App'x 248
Docket Number: No. 08-6355
Parties: Joe Franklin SANDERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 279
Pages: 248–249

Head Matter:
Joe Franklin SANDERS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; Henry McMaster, Attorney General for South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 08-6355.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: May 22, 2008.
Decided: May 30, 2008.
Joe Franklin Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, South Carolina Attorney General’s Office, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Joe Franklin Sanders 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 Sanders 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.