Case ID: f-appx_709/html/0241-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Dean MEARS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 17-7163
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: January 8, 2018
    Decided: January 29, 2018
    
      Richard Dean Mears, Appellant Pro Se. Joan Brodish Childs, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard Dean Mears appeals the district court’s order overruling Mears’ objection to the writ of continuing garnishment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Mears, No. 1:04-cr-00212-WO-1 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2017). 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 
      
       Mears takes issue with the district court’s statement that he did not claim that his 401(k) retirement plan is exempt property. Any error was harmless, because such retirement plan benefits are subject to garnishment for criminal restitution. United States v. DeCay, 620 F.3d 534, 541 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Hosking, 567 F.3d 329, 334 (7th Cir. 2009); United States v. Novak, 476 F.3d 1041, 1053 (9th Cir. 2007); United States v. Irving, 452 F.3d 110, 126 (2d Cir. 2006),