Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse ROWLAND, Jr., Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-12-02
Citations: 51 F. App'x 440
Docket Number: No. 02-7190
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse ROWLAND, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 51
Pages: 440–440

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse ROWLAND, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-7190.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 21, 2002.
Decided Dec. 2, 2002.
Jesse Rowland, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. David Bernard Smith, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Jesse Rowland, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court's order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a proceeding under § 2255 unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2255 motion 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.2001) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000)). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Rowland has not made the requisite showing. See United States v. Rowland, Nos. CR-94-251; CA-00-1116-1 (M.D.N.C. Sept. 18, 2001). 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.