Case Name: Philip Scott FURR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-09-27
Citations: 46 F. App'x 720
Docket Number: No. 02-6595
Parties: Philip Scott FURR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 46
Pages: 720–721

Head Matter:
Philip Scott FURR, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Charles M. Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 02-6595.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 19, 2002.
Decided Sept. 27, 2002.
Philip Scott Furr, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Philip Scott' Furr seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Furr has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Furr v. South Carolina, No. CA-01-108-9-24 (D.S.C. Mar. 28, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). 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.