
    Arsean L. HICKS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. D.A. BRAXTON, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.
    No. 04-7006.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 11, 2004.
    Decided Oct. 28, 2004.
    Arsean L. Hicks, Appellant pro se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM.

Arsean L. Hicks appeals from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as untimely filed. An appeal may not be taken to this court 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 jurists of reason 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 reviewed the record and conclude that Hicks has not made the requisite showing. We therefore 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  