United States v. Salazar

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7333

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MARTIN F. SALAZAR,

Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00123-MBS-1)

Submitted: March 15, 2011 Decided: March 18, 2011

Before MOTZ and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Martin F. Salazar, Appellant Pro Se. Dean A. Eichelberger, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Martin F. Salazar appeals the district court’s order

denying his Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 motion for a new trial based on

new evidence. His motion was based upon alleged new evidence

regarding his attorney’s suspension for actions in another case.

On appeal, Salazar does not challenge the district court’s

conclusion that this is not the type of evidence that can

support a Rule 33 motion. As such, he has waived any challenge

to the district court’s dispositive ruling. See 4th Cir. R.

34(b) (failure to raise claim in informal brief waives

consideration of that claim). Accordingly, we affirm. We deny

Salazar’s motions for appointment of counsel and for a

transcript. 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