Case Name: Stephen SINGS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Reggie WEISNER, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-12-22
Citations: 161 F. App'x 237
Docket Number: No. 05-7491
Parties: Stephen SINGS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Reggie WEISNER, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 161
Pages: 237–238

Head Matter:
Stephen SINGS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Reggie WEISNER, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 05-7491.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 15, 2005.
Decided Dec. 22, 2005.
Stephen Sings, Appellant Pro Se.
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Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Stephen Sings, a North Carolina prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as untimely under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. 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 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 the district court's assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong 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 Sings has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny his motion for a certificate of appeal-ability 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