Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 9 views

    United States v. Edwards, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of James Henry Edwards' motion for return of property. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    United States v. Edwards, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    9 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of James Henry Edwards' motion for return of property. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-12-10 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 97-6938

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of James Henry Edwards' motion for return of property. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    9 views2 pages

    United States v. Edwards, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished opinion affirming the district court's denial of James Henry Edwards' motion for return of property. The Court of Appeals reviewed the record and found no reversible error in the district court's reasoning for denying the motion. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's ruling without requiring oral arguments, as the facts and legal arguments were clearly presented in the case materials.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 97-6938

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    JAMES HENRY EDWARDS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR93-269-S)
    Submitted:

    November 20, 1997

    Decided:

    December 10, 1997

    Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James Henry Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. John Francis Purcell, Jr.,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his
    motion for return of 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.
    Edwards, No. CR-93-269-S (D. Md. June 27, 1997). 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

    You might also like