PER CURIAM.
Scott Fitzgerald Miller appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to modify terms of imprisonment. For the first time on appeal, Miller claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to object to an improper sentence enhancement. We will not consider this claim because Miller failed to show that any exceptional circumstances exist. Muth v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir.1993). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Miller, No. CR-98-875 (D.S.C. Oct. 29, 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.
AFFIRMED.