Court Opinion

ID: 1016951
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 21:57:17.427903+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:41:42.913745
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                               No. 05-6548

JAMES ERVIN MCGEE, JR.,

                                               Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus

JONATHAN OZMINT; COLIE RUSHTON; HENRY DARGAN
MCMASTER,

                                              Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CA-04-1377-MBS-8)

Submitted:   August 18, 2005                 Decided:   August 25, 2005

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Ervin McGee, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka,
Chief Deputy Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

               James Ervin McGee, Jr., seeks to appeal the district

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge

and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as

untimely.       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 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).              We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that McGee has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal as untimely.           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

                                       - 2 -