Case Name: Robert L. STYLES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willard JOBE, Superintendent-AMCI, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-05-16
Citations: 132 F. App'x 432
Docket Number: No. 04-7629
Parties: Robert L. STYLES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willard JOBE, Superintendent-AMCI, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 132
Pages: 432–433

Head Matter:
Robert L. STYLES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willard JOBE, Superintendent-AMCI, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-7629.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 23, 2005.
Decided: May 16, 2005.
Robert L. Styles, Appellant pro se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MICHAEL and DUNCAN, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Robert L. Styles 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 habeas corpus 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 for claims addressed by a district court 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, 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 Styles 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