UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-7392
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RENED MARTINEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (6:06-cr-00503-MGL-2)
Submitted: January 21, 2020 Decided: January 24, 2020
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rened Martinez, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rened Martinez appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a new trial,
pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, in which he sought to challenge his
conviction in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct.
2191, 2194 (2019) (holding that, in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2018) prosecution, “the
Government . . . must show that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and also that
he knew he had the relevant status when he possessed it”). We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. United States v. Martinez, No. 6:06-cr-00503-MGL-2 (D.S.C. Aug. 22, 2019). If
Martinez wishes to raise a new constitutional claim, he must do so in a motion to vacate,
set aside, or correct the sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. A second or successive
motion must be authorized by this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2