E.D.Wis.: Innocent person whose property was seized can petition in criminal case for return of property

The court finds it has ancillary jurisdiction over a return of property question not directly involved in this case. Petitioner owned it and it was at the place searched and does hold evidence of crime. United States v. Solberg, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157797 (E.D. Wis. Sep. 6, 2023).

The officers here conducted a valid protective sweep of adjacent rooms. United States v. Reyes-Valdez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157156 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 6, 2023)* (it is mentioned as significant they were not wearing protective vests, but that really doesn’t matter).

“This case presents a close call. On one hand, an argument can be advanced that after the NBPD has arrested the Defendant without incident, because there was no search warrant, any entry into the hotel room was unjustified. If the police were concerned that other people and guns were in the room, they could have merely kept the room under surveillance and sought a search warrant. On the other hand, there was a concern that if others were in the room with weapons, there was a possibility that those persons could pose a danger to the officers below.” United States v. Uriegas-Montez, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157169 (W.D. Tex. Sep. 6, 2023).*

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

Comments are closed.