\u201cAs this Court has tried to explain several times, the property Turner seeks is held by the Illinois State Police–not the Federal Government. The Court cannot order the Government to return something that it does not have. For these reasons, the Court DENIES Turner’s Motion for Return of Property. If Turner files another motion here to obtain the seized property, then the Court will consider imposing a filing ban.\u201d United States v. Turner, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13009 (S.D. Ill. Jan. 25, 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Defendant alleges a false statement supported nexus. \u201cAllen has not shown that any of the information in the search warrant affidavit was false or made with reckless disregard for the truth. Moreover, even if the contested language is excised, the warrant affidavit still supports probable cause to believe that evidence of drug dealing would be found at the Allen residence. Accordingly, and for these reasons, defendant’s motion to reopen suppression proceedings is DENIED.\u201d United States v. Allen, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12858 (N.D. Ohio Jan. 25, 2021).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cAs this Court has tried to explain several times, the property Turner seeks is held by the Illinois State Police–not the Federal Government. The Court cannot order the Government to return something that it does not have. For these reasons, … Continue reading