Opinion ID: 588423
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Introduction of New Evidence on Redirect Examination

Text: 9 During Malachi's trial, the Government called as a witness Sergeant Elkins, one of the arresting officers. On redirect examination, Elkins testified that Malachi had admitted that he had had one or two drinks. Malachi contends that the magistrate judge erred by allowing this testimony because it exceeded the scope of direct and cross examination. Malachi failed to raise this claim when he appealed the magistrate judge's decision to the district court. 10 It is well established that, except in exceptional circumstances, a party may not raise on appeal issues which were not presented below. United States v. The Barge Shamrock, 635 F.2d 1108, 1111 (4th Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 830 (1981). We find this principle applicable here. We find no exceptional circumstances and, even if the issue were not waived, the district court's ruling was not an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Lopez, 575 F.2d 681, 686 (9th Cir. 1978).