Case ID: f-appx_110/html/0324-01.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. Mohammed HAMMOUDE, a/k/a Mohammad Hammoudeh, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mohammed Hammoude, a/k/a Mohammad Hammoudeh, a/k/a Mohammad Hammoudeh, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-4952.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 20, 2004.
    Decided: Sept. 29, 2004.
    Mohammed Hammoude, Appellant pro se.
    Robert William Wiechering, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    
      Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
   PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Mohammed Hammoude appeals the district court’s orders denying his post-conviction motions for return of property under Fed. R.Crim.P. 41(g) and for a downward departure due to diminished capacity. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Hammoude, CR-00-9-A (E.D. Va. filed Oct. 24, 2003; entered Oct. 27, 2003 & May 17, 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