UNITED STATES v. MEARS (2018)

Richard Dean Mears appeals the district court's order overruling Mears’ objection to the writ of continuing garnishment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.^* United States v. Mears, No. 1:04-cr-00212-WO-1 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.   Mears takes issue with the district court's statement that he did not claim that his 401(k) retirement plan is exempt property. Any error was harmless, because such retirement plan benefits are subject to garnishment for criminal restitution. United States v. DeCay, 620 F.3d 534, 541 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Hosking, 567 F.3d 329, 334 (7th Cir. 2009); United States v. Novak, 476 F.3d 1041, 1053 (9th Cir. 2007); United States v. Irving, 452 F.3d 110, 126 (2d Cir. 2006).

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.