Case ID: f-appx_11/html/0296-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard L. DIXON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 00-7532.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted April 27, 2001.
    Decided June 7, 2001.
    Clayton Reed Kaeiser, Miami, FL, for appellant. Michael Lee Keller, Charleston, WV, for appellee.
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Richard L. Dixon seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion agreeing with the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Dixon, Nos. CR-96-191; CA-99-1011-2 (S.D.W.Va. Sept. 7, 2000). We decline to consider Dixon’s claims that he was denied effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal because he failed to raise these claims in the district court. Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir.1993). 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.