ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY *

Pro se petitioner Randy Rice, imprisoned in Oklahoma for state drug crimes, seeks a certificate of appealability (“COA”) for this court to review the district court’s' rulings on the two claims in his request for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (requiring a COA to appeal “the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding in which the detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court”).

First, the district court dismissed his claim for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d). Second, the court denied his claim alleging that the state district court considering his post-conviction challenge did not follow Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 5.4(A), which calls for findings of fact and conclusions of law. It said this is not a cognizable federal habeas claim.

Because Mr. Rice’s brief does not address either ruling, he has not made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right,” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), which he must to obtain a COA, see Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000). We therefore deny COA and dismiss this matter.