Case Name: Fred SHORES, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-05-02
Citations: 62 F. App'x 59
Docket Number: No. 03-6281
Parties: Fred SHORES, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 62
Pages: 59–60

Head Matter:
Fred SHORES, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 03-6281.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 24, 2003.
Decided May 2, 2003.
Fred Shores, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallaee-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Fred Shores, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) and denying his motion under Fed. R.Civ.P. 59(e). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can 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.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and concluded that Shores has not made the requisite showing. 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.