FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit

FEB 1 2001

PATRICK FISHER
Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

SEBRIN CHATMAN,

		Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

JAMES SAFFLE; THE OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA,

		Respondents-Appellees.	

No.  00-7042
(D.C. No. 99-CV-111-P)
(E.D. Okla.)	

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before BRORBY, PORFILIO, and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.

	After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal.  See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).  The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
	Petitioner, appearing pro se, asks this court to grant him a certificate of appealability, so that he can appeal the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, which he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.  We will issue a certificate of appealability only if petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.”  28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)(1).  Where, as here, the district court rejected the constitutional claims on the merits, “petitioner must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would find [it’s] assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong.”  Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).  Because we find the district court’s assessment of petitioner’s claims neither debatable nor wrong, we deny his application for a certificate of appealability and DISMISS the appeal.
				Entered for the Court

				Wade Brorby
				Circuit Judge