ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7715
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BARRINGTON ISAACS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(CR-98-356, CA-01-2230-2-18)
Submitted: June 19, 2003 Decided: September 26, 2003
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Barrington Isaacs, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Hayden Bickerton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Barrington Isaacs appeals the district court’s orders denying
relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) and
denying his motion for reconsideration. Although we initially
dismissed this appeal on the ground that Isaacs failed to meet the
standard for the issuance of a certificate of appealability, we
granted Isaacs’s rehearing petition and have now considered the
appeal on the merits. Based on our review of the record, however,
we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
stated by the district court. See United States v. Isaacs, Nos.
CR-98-356; CA-01-2230-2-18 (D.S.C. filed July 8, 2002 & entered
July 11, 2002; filed Sept. 3, 2002 & entered Sept. 5, 2002); see
also Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993)
(declining to consider claim raised for the first time on appeal).
We deny Isaacs’s motion for judicial notice. 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
2