UNPUBLISHED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Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).
2