United States v. Alberto Castro

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that undue delay in initiating civil forfeiture proceed- ings could “demonstrate[] a denial of . . . due process”
• recognizing that undue delay in initiating civil forfeiture proceed- ings could “demonstrate[] a denial of . . . due process”
• adopting district court's ruling that the district court was without jurisdiction to consider Rule 41(e) motion for return of property following civil forfeiture proceeding
• “Defendant cannot use the criminal procedure device of [Rule 41(g)] to seek relief from a civil forfeiture proceeding.”
• “It is well-settled that the proper method for recovery of property which has been subject to civil forfeiture is not the filing of a Rule 41(e) Motion, but filing a claim in the civil forfeiture action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).