Harvey E. Tunstall, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Tunstall has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See Tunstall v. Beale, No. CA-04-688-1 (E.D. Va. filed, June 24, 2004; entered, June 25, 2004). Accordingly, we deny Tunstall’s motions for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000).

To the extent that Tunstall’s notice of appeal and appellate brief can be construed as a motion for authorization to file a successive § 2254 petition, we deny such authorization. See United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 995, 124 S.Ct. 496, 157 L.Ed.2d 395 (2003). 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