Michael C. Wease, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his habeas corpus petition, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), as time-barred. The district court dismissed the petition as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).

To be entitled to a certificate of appealability, Wease must make “a substantial *629 showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2258(c)(2) (2000). When a district court dismisses solely on procedural grounds, the movant “must demonstrate both (1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right,’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir. 2001) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)). Upon examination of Wease’s petition, we cannot conclude that reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether the district court correctly concluded that the petition was untimely filed. Accordingly, we deny Wease’s motion for appointment of counsel, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal.

DISMISSED