United States v. Samuel Acosta, No. 12-1082 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Criminal law. Denial of motion under Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) for return of property affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 12-1082 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Samuel Acosta, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Southern District of Iowa. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: June 12, 2012 Filed: June 9, 2012 ___________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. 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). _________________________________ 1 The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
