United States v. Mitchell

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7944

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMAL MITCHELL, a/k/a Boo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (1:02-cr-00025-JCC-1)

Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: April 30, 2009

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jamal Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollenhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Jamal Mitchell appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for the return of property, pursuant to Fed.

R. Crim. P. 41(g). We review the denial of a Rule 41(g) motion

for return of property for an abuse of discretion. United

States v. Chambers, 192 F.3d 374, 376 (3d Cir. 1999). We have

reviewed the record and find no abuse of discretion.

Accordingly, we deny Mitchell’s motion for substantive relief

and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See

United States v. Mitchell, No. 1:02-cr-00025-JCC-1 (E.D. Va.

Aug. 20, 2008). 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