Case Name: Albert James WHITE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, RespondentAppellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-07-23
Citations: 103 F. App'x 516
Docket Number: No. 04-6709
Parties: Albert James WHITE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 103
Pages: 516–516

Head Matter:
Albert James WHITE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-6709.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 15, 2004.
Decided: July 23, 2004.
Albert James White, Appellant pro se.
Stephen R. McCullough, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Albert James White seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding 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 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that White 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