N.D. Okla.: Claimant has a right to timely return of money seized without evidentiary value

Plaintiff states a claim for failure to return money lawfully seized but without evidentiary value. Springer v. Horn, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43072 n.2 (N.D. Okla. May 20, 2009):

The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of the people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures. Winters v. Board of County Commissioners, 4 F.3d 848, 853 (10th Cir. 1993), citing Soldal v. Cook County, Illinois, 506 U.S. 56, 61 (1992). A “seizure” of property occurs when there is some meaningful interference with an individual’s possessory interests in that property.” Winters, 4. F.3d at 853, citing Soldal, 506 U.S. at 61. The Tenth Circuit has held that a failure timely to return seized material which is without evidentiary value and which is not subject to forfeiture may state a constitutional or statutory claim. Davis v. Gracey, 111 F.3d 1472, 1477 (10th Cir. 1997).

Defendant got a Franks hearing, but he failed in his burden of proof “[i]n light of the strong presumption that search warrant affidavits are valid.” United States v. Hazelrigg, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43022 (D. S.D. February 2, 2009).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.