Case Name: Johnny Lee LUCAS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willie EAGLETON, Warden of Evans Correctional Institution; Henry McMaster, 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: 2004-09-22
Citations: 109 F. App'x 594
Docket Number: No. 04-6741
Parties: Johnny Lee LUCAS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Willie EAGLETON, Warden of Evans Correctional Institution; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 109
Pages: 594–594

Head Matter:
Johnny Lee LUCAS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Willie EAGLETON, Warden of Evans Correctional Institution; Henry McMaster, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents—Appellees.
No. 04-6741.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 16, 2004.
Decided Sept. 22, 2004.
Johnny Lee Lucas, Appellant pro se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, John William McIntosh, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Johnny Lee Lucas 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 in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a state court unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 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). As to claims dismissed by the district court 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)). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lucas has not satisfied either standard. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). 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