Ronnie Blade v. United States, No. 08-3480 (8th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal Case - return of property. District court's denial of Rule 41(g) motion for return of property is summarily affirmed. Denial of motion for appointment of counsel was not an abuse of discretion.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-3480 ___________ Ronnie Blade, Appellant, v. United States of America, Appellee. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: January 13, 2010 Filed: February 4, 2010 ___________ Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Ronnie Blade appeals the district court s1 denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) motion for the return of property. Upon careful review, see Jackson v. United States, 526 F.3d 394, 396 (8th Cir. 2008) (legal conclusions reviewed de novo and findings of fact reviewed for clear error), we find no basis for reversal. We also find no abuse of discretion in the district court s denial of Blade s motion for appointed counsel. See Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d 791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006) (district court s 1 The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. denial of appointed counsel reviewed for abuse of discretion; relevant factors). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
