Legal Opinion

Hill v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 1, 1993No. Misc. 93-0070PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

NEWCOMER, District Judge.

Before the court is Plaintiff, James Hill’s, Motion for Return of Seized Property. For the following reasons, the court will dismiss plaintiffs motion.

I. Factual Background:

On, or around, March 14, 1989, $8,709.00 and seven firearms were seized from James Hill, Jr.’s residence at 280 S. 60th Street in Philadelphia. On June 21, 1989, pursuant to 21 C.F.R. § 1316.75 and 19 U.S.C. § 1607, the Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) caused notice of the seizure to be published in the USA Today, a publication of local and national circulation, for three successive weeks.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dwyer v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1989
  2. Brantz v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1989

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Vance v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997
  2. Little v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999
  3. United States v. One 1990 GMC Jimmy, VIN 1GKEV18K4LF504365District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1997
  4. McDaniel v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API