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

OH2: Arrest clothes in jail storage can be searched without a warrant

Under established authority from 1993 in this court, defendant’s clothes from his arrest in storage at the jail can be tested for evidence without a warrant. State v. Wells, 2024-Ohio-4813 (2d Dist. Oct. 4, 2024). Defendant pled guilty and only … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Inventory, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OH2: Arrest clothes in jail storage can be searched without a warrant

S.D.Ohio: City’s mowing unkempt yard wasn’t 4A violatoin

The city’s coming on to a sovereign citizen’s yard to mow it when he refused did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Prows v. City of Oxford, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177976 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 30, 2024).* Defendant’s motion for return … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Curtilage, Ineffective assistance, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Trespass | Comments Off on S.D.Ohio: City’s mowing unkempt yard wasn’t 4A violatoin

W.D.Pa.: A state court dispute over return of seized property held by feds heading toward contempt was removable to federal court

Defendant’s property was seized under a state search warrant. Defendant sought return in state court, but it had been transferred to federal officers. They refused return. Contempt was sought against the federal officers in state court and this was removable … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Issue preclusion, Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: A state court dispute over return of seized property held by feds heading toward contempt was removable to federal court

Natl. L. Rev.: The Reasonableness of Retaining Personal Property Post-Seizure and the Ascendancy of Text, History, and Tradition in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence

Natl. L. Rev.: The Reasonableness of Retaining Personal Property Post-Seizure and the Ascendancy of Text, History, and Tradition in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence by Ty E. Howard [the case is posted here]:

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure | Comments Off on Natl. L. Rev.: The Reasonableness of Retaining Personal Property Post-Seizure and the Ascendancy of Text, History, and Tradition in Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence

OR: Def’s removing a vehicle from impound lot subject to SW supported tampering charge even if the initial seizure was invalid

After a stop, defendant’s truck was seized and he was told that a search warrant would be sought for it. In the impound lot at 3 and 5 am, defendant showed up in the impound lot and was seen on … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Plain view, feel, smell, Probation / Parole search, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OR: Def’s removing a vehicle from impound lot subject to SW supported tampering charge even if the initial seizure was invalid

CADC: Unreasonable retention of property after a case is resolved can violate 4A

Looking to the common law, unreasonable retention of property after a case is resolved can violate the Fourth Amendment. Asinor v. District of Columbia, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 20098 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 9, 2024):

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure | Comments Off on CADC: Unreasonable retention of property after a case is resolved can violate 4A

NE: Return of property denied where post-conviction time hadn’t run

Defendant’s motion for return of property is denied because the time hasn’t run for post-conviction and it still may be needed by the state. State v. Assad, 317 Neb. 20 (July 5, 2024). Defendant did not present a real Franks … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Franks doctrine, Plain view, feel, smell, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on NE: Return of property denied where post-conviction time hadn’t run

CA11: Denial of 41(g) motion for return of property not appealable while case or investigation is going on

Denial of a Rule 41(g) motion for return of property lacks jurisdiction for an interlocutory appeal when there’s a pending criminal investigation. Burke v. United States, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12590 (11th Cir. May 24, 2024). “Considering the totality of … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Seizure | Comments Off on CA11: Denial of 41(g) motion for return of property not appealable while case or investigation is going on

CA5: CBP dog sniffing for people was PC even if it couldn’t differentiate between the driver and alleged hidden passengers

A CBP dog trained to sniff for people provided reasonable suspicion even against the argument of how the dog could differentiate between the truck driver and hidden passengers. United States v. Martinez, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 12043 (5th Cir. May … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA5: CBP dog sniffing for people was PC even if it couldn’t differentiate between the driver and alleged hidden passengers

N.D.Okla.: Cell phones possessed by tribal police not subject to return under Rule 41(g)

Motion for return of cell phones is denied. They are in the possession of the Muskogee Creek Nation tribal police, not the federal government. United States v. Smith, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87341 (N.D. Okla. May 15, 2024). Motion for … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Uncategorized | Comments Off on N.D.Okla.: Cell phones possessed by tribal police not subject to return under Rule 41(g)

PA: With PC, moving a car to a police location for a SW was reasonable

Probable cause was developed on the streets for search of defendant’s car for drug evidence when officers saw him take money, return to the car, get something small, and return to the payor, twice. Removing the car to a different … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Scope of search, Stop and frisk | Comments Off on PA: With PC, moving a car to a police location for a SW was reasonable

E.D.Cal.: Motion for return of property can’t be granted while criminal proceedings still pending

A motion for return of property involved in a criminal case can’t be entertained until all proceedings have concluded. Here, the 2255 has neither been filed nor resolved. United States v. Kindley, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31431 (E.D. Cal. Feb. … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Protective sweep, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on E.D.Cal.: Motion for return of property can’t be granted while criminal proceedings still pending

CA9: Wholesale inventory searches of private safe deposit boxes in SW for business was unreasonable

US Private Vaults case reversed. The search of USPV’s 700 safe deposit boxes for inventory was unreasonable. The FBI obtained a warrant for USPV’s business because of its business practices, and this search of the safe deposit boxes of customers … Continue reading

Posted in Inventory, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Scope of search | Comments Off on CA9: Wholesale inventory searches of private safe deposit boxes in SW for business was unreasonable

OH6: Return of property can’t be by motion to suppress after PG

Defendant’s motion for return of his cell phone after his guilty plea was pled as a motion to suppress. Denied. He can do it over if he gets it right. State v. Cousino, 2024-Ohio-114, 2024 Ohio App. LEXIS 110 (6th … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OH6: Return of property can’t be by motion to suppress after PG

OH8: State showed need for evidence for further investigation after indictment dismissed without prejudice so no return

Evidence was seized, including a cell phone, and defendant was charged with a violent crime. As the case progressed to trial, the state moved to dismiss without prejudice so it could investigate further. Defendant sought return of the evidence. On … Continue reading

Posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Waiver | Comments Off on OH8: State showed need for evidence for further investigation after indictment dismissed without prejudice so no return

CA2: Pending 2255 petition justifies denial of Rule 41(g) petition

The business’s petition for return of records obtained by search warrant and grand jury subpoena is denied. The business’s principal is still litigating his criminal case and a 2255 is pending, and that justifies it. Allen v. Grist Mill Capital … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Overbreadth, Qualified immunity, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on CA2: Pending 2255 petition justifies denial of Rule 41(g) petition

D.Mass.: Plea agreement foreclosed return of property

Defendant’s plea agreement foreclosed his Rule 41(g) motion for return of property. United States v. Spencer, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206257 (D. Mass. Nov. 17, 2023). Defendant’s motion to reconsider denial of his motion to suppress the timeliness of his … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, Issue preclusion, Motion to suppress, Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Voluntariness | Comments Off on D.Mass.: Plea agreement foreclosed return of property

S.D.N.Y.: If the SW lacks PC, the remedy is a motion to suppress, not a motion to rescind the SW via 41(g)

Defendant filed a motion for the court to rescind the search warrant for his cell phone under Rule 41(g) because it was allegedly defective. The remedy is a motion to suppress, not to rescind. United States v. Cardenas, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Good faith exception, Informant hearsay, Probable cause, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: If the SW lacks PC, the remedy is a motion to suppress, not a motion to rescind the SW via 41(g)

S.D.Cal.: A pending forfeiture action in another district justifies dismissal of Rule 41(g) motion because there is another remedy

This is a Rule 41(g) action for return of property, a superyacht owned by a Russian oligarch seized allegedly in violation of Russian sanctions. The next day, a forfeiture action was filed in the S.D.N.Y., and that provided an adequate … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Prison and jail searches, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: A pending forfeiture action in another district justifies dismissal of Rule 41(g) motion because there is another remedy

OH11: Person seeking return of property seized need not provide actual evidence in the petition

In a petition for return of property seized from a business, it was only required to show a possessory interest and likelihood of return. An evidentiary quality response isn’t required. State v. Allen, 2023-Ohio-4032, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 3869 (11th … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of pleading, Cell phones, Reasonable suspicion, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on OH11: Person seeking return of property seized need not provide actual evidence in the petition