United States v. Heggen
This text of United States v. Heggen (United States v. Heggen) 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.
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-7253
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BRUCE CHARLES HEGGEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CR-01-46)
Submitted: November 6, 2003 Decided: November 20, 2003
Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Bruce Charles Heggen, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Marie Hoefling, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:
Bruce Charles Heggen appeals the district court’s order
denying without prejudice his motion for return of seized property.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. See United States v. Heggen, No. CR-01-46 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 6,
2003). 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Heggen, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-heggen-ca4-2003.