Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the district court's rulings on the defendant's motions regarding weapons evidence, prejudicial testimony, the public authority defense, and newly discovered evidence

ISSUES PRESENTED 1. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming the District Court’s abuse of its discretion in admitting evidence of weapons found in Mr. Dykes’ residence where Mr. Dykes was not charged with weapons offenses, in violation of Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) and Fed. R. Evid. 403? 2. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming the District Court's abuse of its discretion in denying an in-trial Motion for a Mistrial, and a post-trial Motion for a New Trial, based on a Government witness’ severely prejudicial, unsolicited and inflammatory testimony about Mr. Dykes? 3. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming the District Court's abuse its discretion in declining to give a public authority defense jury instruction to the jury? 4. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming the District Court's abuse of its discretion when it denied Mr. Dykes’ Pro Se Motion for a New Trial based on Newly Discovered Evidence? 5. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming that the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to convict Mr. Dykes of Counts I; XVIII, given the District Court’s failure to give the jury the public authority jury instruction? 6. Did the Fourth Circuit err in affirming the entry of a money judgment of forfeiture? vi