Thompson v. Eagleton , 122 F. App'x 68 ( 2005 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-7453
KIRT ELIOT THOMPSON,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
WILLIE EAGLETON, Warden, Evans Correctional
Institution; HENRY D. MCMASTER, Attorney
General of the State of South Carolina,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. Patrick Michael Duffy, District
Judge. (CA-03-3650)
Submitted: February 9, 2005 Decided: February 25, 2005
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kirt Eliot Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Kirt Eliot Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s
order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and
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
§ 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 both 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 Thompson has not made the requisite showing.
Accordingly, we 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 -