Paul Ed Newton seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find Newton has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district court. See Newton v. Washington, No. CA-01-477-7 (W.D.Va. Aug. 5, 2002). 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.