
    Gary Lewis MILLER-EL, Islam M.A. Muhammed Gary L. Johnson, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Boyd BENNETT; Ms. Branch; B.A. Hoffner; S. Walker; M.C. Norns, Sergeant; Nurse Allen, Respondents-Appellees.
    No. 03-6599.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted July 10, 2003.
    Decided July 16, 2003.
    Gary Lewis Miller-El, Appellant Pro Se.
    
      Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM:

Gary Lewis Miller-El seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) for failure to particularize his claims. 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, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1040, 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.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Miller-El has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave 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.  