Alonzo Brinkley, II v. Jon Ozmint

Filing 920090625

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6551

ALONZO R. BRINKLEY, II, Petitioner ­ Appellant, v. JON OZMINT, Respondent ­ Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief District Judge. (6:08-cv-00308-JFA)

Submitted:

June 18, 2009

Decided:

June 25, 2009

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald Mitchell Brown, Jr., BROWN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Alonzo R. Brinkley, II, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and dismissing Brinkley's 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as untimely filed. justice or judge The order is not appealable unless a circuit issues a certificate of appealability. 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). not issue absent "a

A certificate of appealability will showing of the denial (2006). of a A that the or

substantial 28

constitutional prisoner reasonable

right." this would by

U.S.C. standard

§ 2253(c)(2) by any

satisfies jurists

demonstrating assessment is of

find the

that

constitutional

claims

district

court

debatable

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 Brinkley has not made the of requisite showing. and Accordingly, dismiss the the we deny a We legal

certificate dispense

appealability oral argument

appeal. and

with

because

facts

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED 2