TN: Motion for return of property doesn’t require a motion to suppress and can come after judgment

A state motion for return of property does not require a motion to suppress. “Additionally, the State’s argument that the trial court lacks jurisdiction because the judgment has become final is misplaced. The Defendant is not seeking to challenge his conviction or to reopen the proceedings against him. This court has granted relief to defendants who file a Rule 41(g) motion after they entered guilty pleas.” State v. Rowland, 2015 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 880 (Oct. 30, 2015).

Defendant argued a Franks violation from omission of the fact a probation search occurred prior to the issuance of the search warrant. The probation officer explained in a report that the reference to the probation search was a mistake, and that’s good enough for the court. United States v. Ellis, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147949 (N.D.Cal. Oct. 29, 2015).*

“Courts in th[e Sixth] Circuit use a four-factor guide to determine whether an unarrested suspect may nevertheless be ‘in custody’ for Miranda purposes: (1) the location of the interview; (2) the length and manner of questioning; (3) whether there was any restraint on the individual’s freedom of movement during the interview; and (4) whether the individual was told that he or she did not need to answer the questions.” United States v. Hill, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146931 (E.D.Ky. Oct. 8, 2015).*