UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7850
LAWRENCE DAVIS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
RICKIE HARRISON; CHARLES M. CONDON,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. C. Weston Houck, Senior District
Judge. (CA-01-1940-9)
Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Lawrence Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Creighton Waters, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Lawrence Davis, a state prisoner, 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 (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 Davis has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to
proceed in forma pauperis, 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
- 2 -