Case Name: Calvin A. BROWN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. WARDEN OF POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-04-07
Citations: 91 F. App'x 313
Docket Number: No. 03-7389
Parties: Calvin A. BROWN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. WARDEN OF POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent—Appellee.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 91
Pages: 313–314

Head Matter:
Calvin A. BROWN, Petitioner—Appellant, v. WARDEN OF POWHATAN CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Respondent—Appellee.
No. 03-7389.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 2, 2004.
Decided: April 7, 2004.
Calvin A. Brown, Appellant, pro se.
Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, 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Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Calvin A. Brown seeks to appeal the district court's order denying 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). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent "a substan tial 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 Brown has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Brown's motions to proceed in forma pauperis, 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