Case Name: Simaron D. HILL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of North Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-05-01
Citations: 62 F. App'x 541
Docket Number: No. 03-6112
Parties: Simaron D. HILL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of North Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 62
Pages: 541–542

Head Matter:
Simaron D. HILL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary of North Carolina Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 03-6112.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 3, 2003.
Decided May 1, 2003.
Simaron D. Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallace-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Simaron D. Hill, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court on the merits absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), 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 Hill has not made the requisite showing. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.