 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7262 RONALD R. SMITHERMAN, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CA-01-540-2) Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 4, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald R. Smitherman, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ronald R. Smitherman, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus 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 on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (c)(2) (2000). As to claims subject to dismissal 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.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 , 484 (2000)), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 318 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude that Smitherman has not satisfied either standard. 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 2 materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3 
Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Traxler, Widener
Smitherman v. Angelone
Ronald R. SMITHERMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee
<parties data-order="0" data-type="parties" id="b248-11">
    Ronald R. SMITHERMAN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.
   </parties><br><docketnumber data-order="1" data-type="docketnumber" id="b248-15">
    No. 02-7262.
   </docketnumber><br><court data-order="2" data-type="court" id="b248-16">
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
   </court><br><otherdate data-order="3" data-type="otherdate" id="b248-17">
    Submitted Jan. 30, 2003.
   </otherdate><br><decisiondate data-order="4" data-type="decisiondate" id="b248-18">
    Decided Feb. 4, 2003.
   </decisiondate><br><attorneys data-order="5" data-type="attorneys" id="b248-20">
    Ronald R. Smitherman, Appellant Pro Se. Donald Eldridge Jeffrey, III, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
   </attorneys><br><p data-order="6" data-type="judges" id="b248-21">
    Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
   </p><br><p data-order="7" data-type="disposition" id="b248-22">
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   </p>
Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit