United States v. Williams

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Williams. Read the opinion of the Court — 16 F. App'x 90
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided May 6, 2004·No. 04-6267·Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6267

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CHARLES WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CR-00-8)

Submitted: April 29, 2004 Decided: May 6, 2004

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Charles Williams appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for return of property filed pursuant to Fed. R.

Crim. P. 41. 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. Williams, No. CR-00-8 (E.D.

Va. Dec. 22, 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

- 2 -

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

United States v. Williams, (4th Cir. 2004).

United States v. Williams (United States v. Williams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.