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):<\/p>\n
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<\/a>, 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<\/a>, 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).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Defendant got a Franks<\/a> 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).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading