PER CURIAM.
Paul J. Athey appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint challenging the procedures used by the Virginia Parole Board in deciding to deny him parole, as well as the denial of parole itself. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. To the extent that Athey challenged the procedures used by the Virginia Parole Board, the district court properly construed the action as one under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000), and we affirm the denial of relief on the reasoning of the district court. Athey v. Director of Virginia Dep’t of Corrections, No. CA-00-266-3 (E.D.Va. Dec. 8, 2000). To the extent that Athey’s claims sound in habeas corpus, he has not shown that the denial of parole was unconstitutional in any respect. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss as to this claim. 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.
AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.