that he was going to be identified as a sex offender before he was placed on the website. Based on our holding in Kirby, Robinson was entitled to due process before he was declared a sex offender and identified on the state of Florida’s sex offender website. See Kirby, 195 F.3d at 1292. Robinson has therefore stated a valid due process claim, and the district court erred in dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim on this issue. AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART. 1 . Robinson also devotes a large portion of his brief to challenging his 1988 indictment and conviction for murder, but we will not consider that issue because Robinson failed to argue it before the district court. See Access Now, Inc. v. Southwest Airlines Co., 385 F.3d 1324, 1331 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, this argument constitutes a
holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal holding that generally appellate courts will not review an issue raised for the first time on appeal recognizing the general rule that a court of appeals will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal holding that an argument not raised before the bankruptcy court will not be considered for the first time on appeal