UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-6772
ROBERT WHITEHEAD,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
WILLIE EAGLETON, Warden of ECI; ATTORNEY
GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(CA-04-1383-2)
Submitted: September 23, 2005 Decided: October 13, 2005
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Whitehead, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief
Deputy Attorney General, Melody Jane Brown, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Robert Whitehead seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and
dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(2000). The order is not appealable 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 both
that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims
is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings
by the district court are also debatable or wrong. Miller-El v.
Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.
473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001).
We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that
Whitehead has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny
Whitehead’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny 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 the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 2 -