                             UNPUBLISHED

                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                        FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 11-6187


HARTFORD R. BEST,

                Petitioner - Appellant,

          v.

WARDEN MCKITHER BODISON,

                Respondent – Appellee.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.      R. Bryan Harwell, District
Judge. (2:10-cv-01381-RBH)


Submitted:   May 26, 2011                   Decided:   June 1, 2011


Before KING, SHEDD, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Hartford R. Best, Appellant Pro Se.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

            Hartford R. Best seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing Best’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition as untimely

filed.     The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge     issues     a     certificate       of    appealability.         28     U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006).             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) (2006).              When the

district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies

this    standard     by    demonstrating         that   reasonable     jurists    would

find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional

claims is debatable or wrong.                Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484    (2000);     see    Miller-El    v.    Cockrell,     537    U.S.   322,    336-38

(2003).     When the district court denies relief on procedural

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive

procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right.                         Slack,

529 U.S. at 484-85.           We have independently reviewed the record

and    conclude     that    Best    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



                                             2
before   the   court   and   argument   would   not   aid   the   decisional

process.

                                                                   DISMISSED




                                    3
