Marshall v. Robertson

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6164 ROBERT EARL MARSHALL, Petitioner - Appellant, versus A. D. ROBERTSON, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-00-231-3) Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: July 19, 2001 Before MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Earl Marshall, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Bain Smith, Assis- tant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Robert Earl Marshall appeals the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000).1 We have reviewed the record and the magis- trate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal sub- stantially on the reasoning of the magistrate judge.2 See Marshall v. Robertson, No. CA-00-231-3 (E.D. Va. Jan. 2, 2001). 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 1 The parties consented to jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(a) (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). 2 Marshall raised several new claims for the first time in his informal brief on appeal. Marshall fails to present exceptional circumstances justifying review of these claims. We therefore de- cline to address them. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993). 2