D.Kan.: Return of property denied; although this case dismissed, codefendant’s case still alive

Return of property denied despite the fact defendant’s case was dismissed. Defendant’s wife was his codefendant, and she was convicted, but she’s litigating a 2255, so the evidence may still be needed by the government. United States v. Neighbors, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7023 (D. Kan. January 22, 2015).

Defendant could not suppress recordings of telephone calls (1) made to him during an armed standoff and (2) from the jail. United States v. Headbird, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180911 (D.Minn. December 22, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable expectation of privacy, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.