UNPUBLISHED

                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT


                             No. 03-7582



DENNIS LEE CAMPBELL,

                                               Petitioner - Appellant,

          versus


GENE M. JOHNSON, Director      of   the   Virginia
Department of Corrections,

                                                Respondent - Appellee.


Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District
Judge. (CA-03-274-2)


Submitted: February 19, 2004                 Decided:   February 25, 2004


Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.


Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


Dennis Lee Campbell, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant
Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.


Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:

            Dennis Lee Campbell seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

The order is not appealable 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, 

, 336 (2003); Slack

v. McDaniel, 

, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 

,

683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude    that   Campbell    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




                                     - 2 -