Court Opinion

ID: 1017790
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 22:10:21.262613+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:52:29.208428
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
 

  Bruce Charles Heggen appeals the district court’s order denying his Rule 41(g) motion for return of 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. Heggen,
  
  No. CR-02-145 (W.D.N.C. Sept. 2, 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