UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Richard Lee RICHIE, Defendant - Appellant, 124 F. App'x 218

PER CURIAM: Richard Lee Richie, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order finding his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion untimely. This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1); see Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 368-69, 374 n. 7 (4th Cir.2004). 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 the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and that any dispositive procedural findings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Richie has not shown the district court’s finding of untimeliness to be debatable or wrong. 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