United States v. Search of 2122 21st Road

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States v. Search of 2122 21st Road

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6132

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF 2122 21ST ROAD NORTH ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 18-6133

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF UNIVERSITY MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District Judge. (1:17-cr-00236-LO-JFA-1; 1:17-cr-00237- LO-JFA-1) Submitted: July 30, 2018 Decided: August 20, 2018

Before WYNN, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John C. Kiyonaga, Marcus T. Massey, LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. KIYONAGA, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellants. Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Acting United States Attorney, Daniel T. Young, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Yanping Chen Frame appeals the district court’s

order adopting the magistrate judge’s decision finding that Frame failed to establish a prima

facie case of a violation under Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e), or that Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 or the

Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a (2012), entitles her to relief. We have reviewed the record

and the district court’s orders and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United

States v. Search of 2122 21st Road, No. 1:17-cr-00236-LO-JFA-1 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 23,

2018, entered Jan. 24, 2018); United States v. Search of Univ. Mgmt. & Tech., No. 1:17-

cr-00237-LO-JFA-1 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 23, 2018, entered Feb. 7, 2018). 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

3

Reference

Status
Unpublished