James Newport v. U.S. Dept. of Labor

1The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Missouri.
2In 2002, Rule 41 was reorganized, and the substance of former subsection (e)
was incorporated into subsection (g). See Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 advisory committee’s
notes (2002 amends.) (language of Rule 41 was amended as part of general restyling
of Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; except as otherwise noted, changes were
intended to be stylistic only).
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 10-2394
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Eastern District of Missouri.
Isaac Pike, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: November 30, 2010
Filed: December 6, 2010
___________
Before BYE, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Isaac Pike appeals the district court’s 1 denial of his Federal Rule of Criminal
Procedure 41(e) 2 motions for the return of property. Upon reviewing the district

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
court’s legal conclusions de novo and its findings of fact for clear error, see Jackson
v. United States, 526 F.3d 394, 396 (8th Cir. 2008), we conclude that the district court
properly denied Pike’s motions for the reasons it stated. Accordingly, we affirm. See
8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-- 2 of 2 --