
    Darrell L. RICKS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. James PEQUESE, Warden; J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Respondent—Appellees.
    No. 03-7962.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 15, 2004.
    Decided April 22, 2004.
    Darrell L. Ricks, Appellant pro se.
    Ann Norman Bosse, Office of the Attorney General of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.
    Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    
      Dismissed by unpublished per curiam 1 opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 86(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Darrell L. Ricks seeks to appeal the district court’s orders denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000), and denying reconsideration. 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 Ricks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Ricks’ motion for 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  