Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

104 F.3d 360

Docket No. 96-6917.

United States v. O'Connell

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Dec. 12, 1996. Decided Dec. 19, 1996.

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1996-12-19

Relies on United States v. Little

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1996-12-19

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior District Judge. (CR-90-6-C-P)

Timothy Patrick O'Connell, Appellant Pro Se. Frank DeArmon Whitney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

W.D.N.C.

AFFIRMED.

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying Appellant's motion for return of forefeited property. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. O'Connell, No. CR-90-6-C-P (W.D.N.C. Dec. 19, 1995). 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.

¶2

AFFIRMED.

/104/f3d/360 · .json · Public domain