United States v. 505 Victor Street

Fourth Circuit

United States v. 505 Victor Street

50 F. App'x 144

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 13, 2002

DocketNo. 02-1978

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 F. App'x 144 (United States v. 505 Victor Street) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. 505 Victor Street, 50 F. App'x 144 (4th Cir. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Paul Franklin Cassell appeals the district court’s decree and judgment of forfeiture. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Cassell’s motion to supplement the record on appeal and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cassell, No. CA-00-419 (M.D.N.C. July 18, 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.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Paul Franklin Cassell appeals the district court’s decree and judgment of forfeiture. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant Cassell’s motion to supplement the record on appeal and affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cassell, No. CA-00-419 (M.D.N.C. July 18, 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.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 F. App'x 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-505-victor-street-ca4-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack