Court Opinion

ID: 9365014
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-20 21:00:43.313211+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:43.177296
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1868      Doc: 6         Filed: 01/19/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-1868

        JIMMY ALLEN ROBERTS,

                             Petitioner - Appellant,

                      v.

        ERIK A. HOOKS, Secretary of NCDPS, substituted for Barney Owens,

                             Respondent - Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at
        Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:21-cv-00058-MR)

        Submitted: January 17, 2023                                       Decided: January 19, 2023

        Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        Jimmy Allen Roberts, Appellant Pro Se.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-1868      Doc: 6         Filed: 01/19/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Jimmy Allen Roberts, a North Carolina inmate, seeks to appeal the district court’s

        order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565

        U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute

        of limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C.

        § 2244(d)(1)). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

        certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). 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). When, as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the

        prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that

        the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez, 565

        U.S. at 140-41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

               We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Roberts has not made

        the requisite showing.      Accordingly, we deny Roberts’ motion for 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 this court and

        argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                                     2