United States v. Beckford

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7208 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEVON DALE BECKFORD, a/k/a Chubbs, a/k/a Trubbey, a/k/a Bull, a/k/a Big Bull, a/k/a Fats, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (CR-96-66, CA-99-512-3) Submitted: November 29, 2001 Decided: December 6, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Devon Dale Beckford, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Devon Dale Beckford seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opin- ion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal- ability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Beckford, Nos. CR-96-66, CA-99-512-3 (E.D. Va. July 5, 2001). We decline to address the new ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised by Beckford for the first time on appeal. See Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that issues raised for first time on appeal gener- ally will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice). 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 2