CA5: Motion for return of property erroneously dismissed; pet’r may have no other remedy

The district court erred in dismissing appellant’s petition for return of documents under Rule 41(g) seized under a warrant with alleged attorney-client privileged materials. If no charges are brought, there will be no motion to suppress. Harbor Healthcare Sys., L.P. v. United States, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 20988 (5th Cir. July 15, 2021).

There was no basis for defense counsel to move to suppress a 911 recording on Fourth Amendment grounds to be ineffective. Chambers v. United States, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 21101 (6th Cir. July 15, 2021).*

Defendant, a felon in possession, was the target of a drug search warrant and firearms were found. The seizure was reasonable even if not mentioned in the warrant, and defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not challenging it. Kelly v. United States, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 21102 (6th Cir. July 15, 2021).*

This entry was posted in Ineffective assistance, Rule 41(g) / Return of property. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.