
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Rufus WOODS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-6390.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted May 16, 2002.
    Decided May 28, 2002.
    
      James Rufus Woods, Appellant Pro Se. David Paul Folmar, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

James Rufus Woods seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. We decline to address Woods’ claim, raised for the first time on appeal, that the district court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him under 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(A) (West 1999 & Supp.2001), because the Government failed to prove that the cocaine base seized from him was in fact crack cocaine. See First Va. Banks, Inc. v. BP Exploration & Oil Inc., 206 F.3d 404, 407 n. 1 (4th Cir.2000) (declining to consider issues raised for first time on appeal); Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (holding that issues raised for first time on appeal generally will not be considered absent exceptional circumstances of plain error or fundamental miscarriage of justice). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Woods, Nos. CR-98-117; CA-01-526-1 (M.D.N.C. filed Feb. 7, 2002; entered Feb. 8, 2002). 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.  