Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): file his § 2254 petition, see Lawrence, 421 F.3d at 1226-27; and (2) the co-defendant's affidavit — indicating that neither he nor San Martin knew about a murder plan — is not evidence of actual innocence of the crime or the death penalty, see Sibley, 377 F.3d at 1205. The district court reasoned that regardless of whether Petitioner planned to kill another person, the murdered individual was killed while Petitioner perpetrated a robbery, which still constitutes first-degree felony murder under Florida law. Moreover, the court said, the death penalty remains permissible because Petitioner never challenged several of the aggra ew affidavit in the Statement of Facts is not enough to preserve the issue for appeal. See La Grasta v. First Union Sec., 358 F.3d 840, 847 n. 4 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); Greenbriar, Ltd. v. City of Alabaster, 881 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that a partys reference to having made an argument before the district court in the statement of facts is not an adequate substitute for elaborating on the merits of the argument on appeal (B) holding argument not asserted before district court is waived on appeal (C) holding that this court need not address the merits of an argument raised for the first time on appeal (D) holding that an argument not made to the circuit court cannot be raised on appeal (E) holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court
Output (English): holding that this court need not address the merits of an argument raised for the first time on appeal