United States v. Davis

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6274

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CURTIS D. DAVIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge. (CR-99-55)

Submitted: April 17, 2003 Decided: April 24, 2003

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Curtis D. Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Timothy Richard Murphy, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Curtis D. Davis appeals the district court’s orders denying

relief on his motion for amendment and correction of the pleadings

and denying reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find

no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. See United States v. Davis, No. CR-99-55

(E.D. Va. Oct. 10, 2002; Jan. 21, 2003). We decline to consider

Davis’s claim, asserted for the first time on appeal, that he was

improperly sentenced under the Sentencing Guidelines.* See

Holland v. Big River Minerals Corp., 181 F.3d 597, 605 (4th Cir.

1999) (issues not raised in district court will generally not be

considered on appeal). 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

* U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (2002).