USCA4 Appeal: 22-6872 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/17/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6872

JEFFREY A. HAZLETT,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

SHELBY SEARLS, Superintendent,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (1:21-cv-00072-JPB-JPM)

Submitted: December 27, 2023 Decided: January 17, 2024

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey A. Hazlett, Appellant Pro Se. Lindsay Sara See, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6872 Doc: 10 Filed: 01/17/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey A. Hazlett seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely

his

petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler,

, 148 & n.9 (2012)

(explaining that § 2254 petitions are subject to one-year statute of limitations, running from

latest of four commencement dates enumerated in

(d)(1)). The order is

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability.

(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”

(c)(2). When, as here,

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. Gonzalez,

-41 (citing Slack v.

McDaniel,

(2000)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hazlett 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 this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED

2