Thelbert Nolan “Pete” Futrell seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude on the reasoning of the district court that Futrell has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Futrell v. Catoe, No. CA-00-1082-M-23 (D.S.C. June 21, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). Futrell’s motion for oral argument is denied because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.