United States v. James Thornberg

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Duane Benton, Pasco M. Bowman and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED) [4129759] [13-2648]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-2648
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
James Edward Thornberg
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Pierre
____________
Submitted: February 28, 2014
Filed: March 5, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
James Thornberg appeals the district court’s1 denial of his motion for the return
of property under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g). He argues that the district court improperly
1

The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota.

Appellate Case: 13-2648

Page: 1

Date Filed: 03/05/2014 Entry ID: 4129759

denied his Rule 41(g) motion seeking the return of his work samples and insurance
documents because this material allegedly could not be derivative contraband when
he had never used any of it as part of a crime.
Upon careful review, we conclude that the government established a legitimate
reason to retain copies of Thornberg’s work samples and insurance documents
because this material is derivative contraband. See Jackson v. United States, 526
F.3d 394, 396-97 (8th Cir. 2008) (after Rule 41(g) movant establishes lawful
entitlement to property, government must then establish legitimate reason to retain
property); cf. United States v. Felici, 208 F.3d 667, 670-71 (8th Cir. 2000)
(explaining derivative contraband).
We thus affirm under 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 13-2648

Page: 2

Date Filed: 03/05/2014 Entry ID: 4129759