United States v. Damian Murphy
United States v. Damian Murphy
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7132
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DAMIAN ANTONIO MURPHY, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon. James P. Jones, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00062-JPJ-1)
Submitted: September 11, 2012 Decided: September 14, 2012
Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Damian Antonio Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer R. Bockhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, Abingdon, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Damian Antonio Murphy appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for the return of seized property. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Murphy, No. 1:06-cr-00062-JPJ-1 (W.D.
Va. June 11, 2012). 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.