Case Name: Alexander JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-07-22
Citations: 103 F. App'x 510
Docket Number: No. 04-6516
Parties: Alexander JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 103
Pages: 510–511

Head Matter:
Alexander JONES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Sherwood R. MCCABE, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-6516.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 15, 2004.
Decided: July 22, 2004.
Alexander Jones, Appellant pro se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Alexander Jones appeals from the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. An appeal may not be taken to this court from the final order in a § 2254 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appeal-ability will not issue absent "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that jurists of reason would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir .2001).
We have reviewed the record and conclude that Jones has not made the requisite showing. We therefore 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 in the decisional process.
DISMISSED