Case Name: Ahmad MUHAMMAD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joseph BROOKS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-13
Citations: 59 F. App'x 593
Docket Number: No. 02-7727
Parties: Ahmad MUHAMMAD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joseph BROOKS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 59
Pages: 593–594

Head Matter:
Ahmad MUHAMMAD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Joseph BROOKS, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 02-7727.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted March 6, 2003.
Decided March 13, 2003.
Ahmad Muhammad, Appellant Pro Se.
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Ahmad Muhammad seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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 conclude that Muhammad has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Muhammad's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). 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.