Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6

CROWE & SCOTT, P.A.
1100 E. Washington St. Suite 200 Phoenix, Arizona 85034-1090 Telephone: (602)252-2570 Facsimile: (602) 252-1939 Email: [email protected] Tom Crowe (#002180) Attorneys for Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) DOMINIC T. AUSTIN (1), et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________)

No. CR04-00313-PHX-FJM
DEFENDANT AUSTIN'S FOR SUMMARY RELIEF MOTION

Defendant, Dominic Austin, requests this Court to summarily grant his motion for return of personal property herein in accordance with this Court's August 15, 2005 order. On July 22, 2005, Defendant moved for the return of the following seized property [doc. 221]: 1. The new clothes that were seized from him at the time of his arrest on May 12, 2003, together with the $139.00 in cash on his person. The $4,100.00 in cash that was seized as a result of the May 13, 2003 search of his apartment at 2134 E. Broadway Road, No. 2016, Tempe, Arizona.

2.

This action was dismissed against Mr. Austin on June 1, 2005. The charges involving the alleged robbery of the Arizona Central Credit Union, to which the subject evidence allegedly related, was dismissed as to all defendants. In addition, as Defendant pointed out, any supposed need for the evidence could be satisfied by simply photographing it. The government agreed that, with respect to the money, none of it contained fingerprints, marked bills, bait bills, dye or other means of identification to any robbery. The government's position with respect to the clothing was unclear. The government did not

Case 2:04-cr-00313-FJM

Document 244

Filed 10/14/2005

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

respond to the fact that any alleged evidentiary need with respect to these items could be preserved by simply photographing the subject evidence. Nevertheless, the government opposed the motion on the grounds that, notwithstanding its motion to dismiss all charges against Mr. Austin and proceeding to trial as to the remaining defendants, it was continuing its investigation and had some unarticulated need to retain the evidence. On August 15, 2005, this Court entered its order denying Mr. Austin's motion without prejudice to reurge it if, within 60 days of the order, the government failed to pursue the matter. The government has been accorded the time which the Court provided and there is no reason why Mr. Austin should not receive the property which is rightfully his. Accordingly, the Court is requested to enter an order summarily granting Defendant's motion and directing the government to return the subject property to the Defendant, or his authorized representative, forthwith. Excludable delay under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) will not occur as a result of this motion or of an order based thereon. DATED this 14th day of October, 2005. CROWE & SCOTT, P.A. By s/ Tom Crowe Tom Crowe 1100 East Washington, Suite 200 Phoenix, Arizona 85034-1090 Attorneys for Defendant

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Submitted by CM/ECF on this 14th day of October, 2005. Courtesy copy mailed on this 14th day of October, 2005, to: Honorable Frederick J. Martone Judge of the District Court Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse Ste 526 401 W Washington St SPC 62 Phoenix AZ 85003-2154 By s/Cindy Malyuk

27 28 2

Case 2:04-cr-00313-FJM

Document 244

Filed 10/14/2005

Page 2 of 2