Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Edwards, 03-7250 (2004)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 03-7250 Visitors: 25
Filed: Jan. 27, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7250 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DALMA S. EDWARDS, a/k/a Mike Edwards, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-01-70) Submitted: January 15, 2004 Decided: January 27, 2004 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublis
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7250 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DALMA S. EDWARDS, a/k/a Mike Edwards, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District Judge. (CR-01-70) Submitted: January 15, 2004 Decided: January 27, 2004 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dalma S. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Robert John Krask, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dalma S. Edwards appeals the district court’s order denying 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. Edwards, No. CR-01-70 (E.D. Va. filed July 28, 2003 & entered July 29, 2003). We also deny Edwards’ motion for transcripts at government expense and for production of documents. 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 -
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer