Category Archives: Rule 41(g) / Return of property

S.D.Ga.: Rule 41(g) doesn’t enable return of property the govt doesn’t have

Property not in the hands of the federal government cannot be ordered returned under Rule 41(g). Administratively forfeited case can’t be returned; there was a remedy. United States v. Morris, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45071 (S.D.Ga. Mar. 19, 2019). Defendant’s … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure | Comments Off on S.D.Ga.: Rule 41(g) doesn’t enable return of property the govt doesn’t have

S.D.Ind.: Once there’s an indictment, a motion to suppress evidence is used rather than a motion for return of property

“Where, as here, an indictment has been filed and criminal proceedings are ongoing, the proper means for seeking return of seized property and to challenge the constitutionality of a search is a motion to suppress evidence.” United States v. Flick, … Continue reading

Posted in Mail and packages, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.Ind.: Once there’s an indictment, a motion to suppress evidence is used rather than a motion for return of property

C.D.Cal. LAPD didn’t violate 4A by not returning a seized gun without a court order as required by CA law

Plaintiff sued LAPD for not returning firearms seized without a state court order as required by California law. Plaintiff hasn’t shown that the LAPD policy violates the Fourth Amendment. Wright v. Beck, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15778 (C.D. Cal. Jan. … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on C.D.Cal. LAPD didn’t violate 4A by not returning a seized gun without a court order as required by CA law

D.N.M.: The fact a SW might be invalid isn’t grounds for an injunction for return of property where prosecution was still contemplated

Plaintiff seeks an injunction contending that the seizure of tax resister literature violated the First and Fourth Amendment. The seizure was based on a warrant that it is evidence of a crime not yet prosecuted. The fact the Fourth Amendment … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Subpoenas / Nat'l Security Letters | Comments Off on D.N.M.: The fact a SW might be invalid isn’t grounds for an injunction for return of property where prosecution was still contemplated

CA9: Court can’t order return of property govt doesn’t have

Defendant can’t get an order for return of property where he can’t show that the government even has it. United States v. Tziu-Uc, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 34105 (9th Cir. Dec. 4, 2018). Self-represented defendant claimed ineffective assistance of counsel … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA9: Court can’t order return of property govt doesn’t have

S.D.Cal.: Yahoo’s intensive internal investigation into CP trafficking reported to NCMEC and then law enforcement was purely private search

Yahoo conducted an extensive internal investigation with public source information and its own records to identify accounts trafficking in child pornography from the Philippines. They reported twice to law enforcement and to NCMEC, and then law enforcement got involved. Yahoo’s … Continue reading

Posted in Private search, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: Yahoo’s intensive internal investigation into CP trafficking reported to NCMEC and then law enforcement was purely private search

LA1: Technical defect in oath for SW not ground to suppress

Technical defect in the oath in the search warrant application doesn’t warrant suppression of evidence. State v. Parker, 2018 La. App. LEXIS 2256 (La. App. 1 Cir. Nov. 10, 2018). A Rule 41(g) motion from pre-2000 seizure wasn’t timely in … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on LA1: Technical defect in oath for SW not ground to suppress

W.D.Wash.: Govt showed cause to deny return of property until 2255 was over in case of retrial

Motion for return of cell phones is denied. The government intends to keep them pending the outcome of defendant’s 2255 or the running of the statute of limitations, which ever occurs first. That’s sufficient need to deny the motion. United … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on W.D.Wash.: Govt showed cause to deny return of property until 2255 was over in case of retrial

S.D.N.Y.: Court can’t return property under Rule 41(g) after civil forfeiture starts

Once a civil forfeiture proceeding has started, the court loses jurisdiction to consider a Rule 41(g) motion for return of property. United States v. Paulino, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176893 (S.D. N.Y. Oct. 16, 2018). The seizure of defendant’s cell … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Forfeiture, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: Court can’t return property under Rule 41(g) after civil forfeiture starts

CA9: Casual conversation with a motorist isn’t barred by Rodriguez despite officer’s motive

Casual conversation with a motorist during a traffic stop isn’t prohibited by Rodriguez even though the officer is hoping to pick up on something supporting reasonable suspicion. United States v. Kash, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 29057 (9th Cir. Oct. 16, … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA9: Casual conversation with a motorist isn’t barred by Rodriguez despite officer’s motive

OH2: Motion for return of property after a forfeiture order is final is moot

A motion for return of property after a forfeiture order is final is moot. State v. Housley, 2018-Ohio-4140, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 4467 (2d Dist. Oct. 12, 2018). There was no Franks violation. Officers got permission from a child to … Continue reading

Posted in Forfeiture, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OH2: Motion for return of property after a forfeiture order is final is moot

OR: Failure to appeal order denying return of property precludes later relief

Defendant’s denial of his motion for return of property was a final appealable order, and his failure to appeal foreclosed later recovery. State v. Fenton, 294 Ore. App. 48, 2018 Ore. App. LEXIS 1091 (Sep. 13, 2018). Defense counsel made … Continue reading

Posted in Forfeiture, Ineffective assistance, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OR: Failure to appeal order denying return of property precludes later relief