United States v. Samuel Acosta
PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: KERMIT E. BYE, STEVEN M. COLLOTON and RAYMOND W. GRUENDER (UNPUBLISHED); Appellee's motion [3914437-2] to strike a portion of Acosta's reply brief is granted.  [12-1082]
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
United States of America,
* Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
* Southern District of Iowa.
Submitted: June 12, 2012
Filed: June 9, 2012
Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Samuel Acosta appeals the district court’s1 denial of his motion under Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g) for return of personal property. Upon careful
review of the relevant record, we conclude that the district court did not err by
denying the motion or failing to hold an evidentiary hearing. See Jackson v. United
States, 526 F.3d 394, 396 (8th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R.
47B. We also grant appellee’s motion to strike a portion of Acosta’s reply brief. See
FTC v. Neiswonger, 580 F.3d 769, 775 (8th Cir. 2009).
The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern
District of Iowa.
Appellate Case: 12-1082
Date Filed: 07/09/2012 Entry ID: 3929606
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?