Case ID: f-appx_103/html/0746-01.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. Earnest HAYNESWORTH, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-6578.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 19, 2004.
    Decided: Aug. 3, 2004.
    Earnest Haynesworth, Appellant pro se.
    Timothy Richard Murphy, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before LUTTIG and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

Earnest Haynesworth appeals the district court’s orders denying his Fed. R.Crim.P. 41(g) motion for return of property and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Haynesworth, No. CR-00-52 (E.D.Va. Feb. 11, 2004). 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