Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Virgil W. WOMACK, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-08-23
Citations: 106 F. App'x 876
Docket Number: No. 03-7006
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Virgil W. WOMACK, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 106
Pages: 876–877

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Virgil W. WOMACK, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-7006.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 13, 2004.
Decided Aug. 23, 2004.
Virgil W. Womack, Appellant pro se. Marvin Jennings Caughman, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, David Calhoun Stephens, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Virgil W. Womack appeals the district court's rulings relative to an evidentiary hearing held on June 11, 2003. Only Womack's challenges to the district court's rulings on his motions for return of property, for a government accounting, and for appointment of counsel are properly before this court for consideration. See Local Rule 34(b). We have reviewed the record and the district court's order reflecting its rulings relative to the motions at issue. We dismiss as moot Womack's appeal of the district court's ruling on his motion for return of property because the district court granted the motion. We affirm the district court's denials of Womack's motions for a government accounting and for appointment of counsel on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Womack, No. CR-00-27; CA-00-236 (D.S.C. 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 IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART