Case Name: Dennis Lee PERRY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William D. CATOE; State of South Carolina; Charles M. Condon, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-09-18
Citations: 18 F. App'x 246
Docket Number: No. 01-7099
Parties: Dennis Lee PERRY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William D. CATOE; State of South Carolina; Charles M. Condon, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 18
Pages: 246–247

Head Matter:
Dennis Lee PERRY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. William D. CATOE; State of South Carolina; Charles M. Condon, South Carolina Attorney General, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 01-7099.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 6, 2001.
Decided Sept. 18, 2001.
Dennis Lee Perry, pro se.
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Dennis Lee Perry seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2000). Although Perry's § 2254 petition was untimely, the district court denied relief for failure to exhaust state remedies. Because Perry's § 2254 was filed outside the applicable one-year limitations period, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal for that reason. See Hernandez v. Caldwell, 225 F.3d 435, 439 (4th Cir.2000). Under Hernandez, Perry had until April 24, 1997 to file his § 2254 petition, and he did not file until January 21, 2001. 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.
We have accorded Perry the benefit of Houston v. Lack. 487 U.S. 266. 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988).