UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7970
KEITH D. WILSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
DON WOOD, Superintendent; THEODIS BECK,
Secretary of Corrections,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Senior
District Judge. (1:06-cv-00408-WLO)
Submitted: April 26, 2007 Decided: May 2, 2007
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Keith D. Wilson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Keith Wilson seeks to appeal the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing
his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as untimely* and the court’s
order denying Wilson’s motion for reconsideration. The orders are
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 that any
assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is
debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by
the district court is likewise debatable. 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 Wilson 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
*
The district court also found Wilson failed to file specific
objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.
- 2 -
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
- 3 -