Opinion ID: 167864
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Issues N ot R aised B elow

Text: M r. Amos raised several additional issues for the first time in his request for a COA: (1) that his appellate counsel was constitutionally ineffective; (2) that the trial court somehow committed constitutional error in denying a motion for a new trial based on new testimony; (3) that the trial court violated his constitutional rights by denying him a new trial or an evidentiary hearing based on the confession of a co-defendant; and (4) that the state district court violated his constitutional rights by denying his motion for postconviction relief without holding an evidentiary hearing. Issues that are not raised before lower courts will rarely be considered by federal appellate courts. Lyons v. Jefferson Bank & Trust, 994 F.2d 716, 720 (10th Cir. 1993). Here, M r. Amos has suggested no special circumstances that require this Court to address his claims for the first time on appeal. United States -8- v. Windrix, 405 F.3d 1146, 1156 (10th Cir. 2005). Therefore, we deny a COA as to the remaining claims.