PER CURIAM.
Samuel R. Anstey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Anstey’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Anstey v. Painter, No. CA-99-120-5 (S.D.W.Va. Mar. 16, 2000). 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.