Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John SCHWENGER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2002-04-29
Citations: 33 F. App'x 123
Docket Number: No. 01-4997
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John SCHWENGER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 33
Pages: 123–124

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John SCHWENGER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 01-4997.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 18, 2002.
Decided April 29, 2002.
John Schwenger, Appellant Pro Se. Sherry L. Muncy, Office of the United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Opinion:
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
John Schwenger appeals the district court's order denying his appeal and affirming the magistrate judge's order adjudicating him guilty of offenses arising from events at Harpers Ferry National Historical Park. We have reviewed the record and the district court's order and the transcript of the proceedings and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm.
Schwenger appeals the district court's decision not to disturb the magistrate judge's ruling denying his motion to suppress evidence. Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that motions to suppress evidence must be made before trial. United States v. Wilson, 115 F.3d 1185, 1190 (4th Cir.1997). Failure to make a motion to suppress before trial constitutes waiver. We find that Schwenger waived the issue of whether evidence should be suppressed.
Because the only issue Schwenger raised before the district court was regarding the suppression of evidence, we do not review the other issues raised in his informal brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.