Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ronald Lee PENNIX, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-04
Citations: 144 F. App'x 354
Docket Number: No. 05-7063
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ronald Lee PENNIX, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 144
Pages: 354–354

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Ronald Lee PENNIX, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 05-7063.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 27, 2005.
Decided: Oct. 4, 2005.
Ronald Lee Pennix, Appellant pro se. Anthony Paul Giorno, Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, Michael Robert Doucette, Kimberley Slayton White, Commonwealth Attorney’s Office, Lynchburg, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, 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Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Ronald Lee Pennix appeals the district court's order dismissing his motion to return seized property. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. Pennix, No. CR-96-763 (W.D.Va. June 24, 2005). 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