Case Name: Christopher Dewayne JACOBS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-16
Citations: 115 F. App'x 146
Docket Number: No. 04-7419
Parties: Christopher Dewayne JACOBS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 146–146

Head Matter:
Christopher Dewayne JACOBS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Theodis BECK, Secretary North Carolina Department of Correction, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 04-7419.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 9, 2004.
Decided: Dec. 16, 2004.
Christopher Dewayne Jacobs, Appellant pro se.
Clarence Joe DelForge, III, North Carolina Department of Justice, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Christopher Dewayne Jacobs seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge and dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) as untimely. An appeal may not be taken 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 appealability 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 reasonable jurists 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 independently reviewed the record and conclude that Jacobs has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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