U.S. v. EVANS, 12 CR. 414 (RWS). (2014)
Court: District Court, S.D. New York
Number: infdco20140428d28
Visitors: 10
Filed: Apr. 10, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 10, 2014
Summary: OPINION ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge. Defendant Morris Evan's motion dated March 3, 2014 seeks of his car, which was seized during the underlying offense. The seizure of the car has already been found proper by this Court, and the Government has agreed to return the car to the Defendant as soon as it is no longer needed as evidence. 1 Accordingly, Defendant's motion is denied as moot. It is so ordered. FootNotes 1. The Defendant has filed a notice of appeal, but has not yet filled his
Summary: OPINION ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge. Defendant Morris Evan's motion dated March 3, 2014 seeks of his car, which was seized during the underlying offense. The seizure of the car has already been found proper by this Court, and the Government has agreed to return the car to the Defendant as soon as it is no longer needed as evidence. 1 Accordingly, Defendant's motion is denied as moot. It is so ordered. FootNotes 1. The Defendant has filed a notice of appeal, but has not yet filled his ..
More
OPINION
ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge.
Defendant Morris Evan's motion dated March 3, 2014 seeks of his car, which was seized during the underlying offense. The seizure of the car has already been found proper by this Court, and the Government has agreed to return the car to the Defendant as soon as it is no longer needed as evidence.1 Accordingly, Defendant's motion is denied as moot.
It is so ordered.
FootNotes
1. The Defendant has filed a notice of appeal, but has not yet filled his appeal. Depending on the nature of the appeal, it may be necessary for the car to be retained as evidence during the pendency of the appeal. As soon as it is no longer possible that the car will be needed as evidence, the Government is not seeking forfeiture and has explicitly a reed to return the car to the Defendant. (See Docket No. 36.)
Source: Leagle
