OR: No right to possession of seized deer illegally hunted

On a motion to reclaim seized property, “[w]e thus conclude that a party seeking to compel the return or restoration of seized property based on a ‘valid claim to rightful possession’ pursuant to ORS 133.643(4) must establish that (1) the item is ‘no longer needed for evidentiary purposes’ and (2) the person is ‘entitled’ to the return or restoration of–that is, can lawfully possess–the item sought to be recovered.” Claimant was not entitled to a deer shot without a hunting license. In re One Black-Tailed Doe Deer Named “Snowball” (Filipeti v. Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife), 224 Ore. App. 122, 197 P.3d 535 (2008).*

Stop was not unreasonably extended when officer found a warrant on the passenger. Drug dog arrived nine minutes later. Henderson v. State, 960 A.2d 627 (Md. App. November 26, 2008).*

Information from CIs, one who was new, about their hand-to-hand drug deals with the defendant was probable cause. United States v. Miller, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96555 (E.D. Pa. November 24, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.