UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7718
CHARLES RAY EDGELL,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
WILLIAM S. HAINES, Warden, Huttonsville
Correctional Center,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief
District Judge. (CA-02-106-1)
Submitted: April 7, 2003 Decided: April 14, 2003
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles Ray Edgell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Charles Ray Edgell, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the
district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(2000) application, which was properly construed as a successive 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. 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 for claims
addressed by a district court 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 both 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, 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.
473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert.
denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have independently reviewed the
record and conclude that Edgell has not made the requisite showing.
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
2