Filed: Sep. 27, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6608 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LEE GUY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cr-00134-BO-1) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6608 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LEE GUY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cr-00134-BO-1) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinio..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6608 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LEE GUY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, Chief District Judge. (7:12-cr-00134-BO-1) Submitted: September 24, 2019 Decided: September 27, 2019 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lee Guy, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Lee Guy appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion for return of property, Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g). 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. Guy, No. 7:12-cr-00134-BO-1 (E.D.N.C., Feb. 26, 2019). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
