PER CURIAM.
Charles M. Anderson appeals the district court’s order construing his motion for a new trial as a successive petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2001) and denying it without prejudice. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Anderson v. Lee, No. CA-00-827-AM (E.D.Va. filed June 25, 2001; entered June 26, 2001). 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.