Center Art Galleries--Hawaii, Inc. William D. Mett v. United States

Bad Law
875 F.2d 747·1989 WL 51355·1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 6983
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 198988-2474California3,712 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

The government appeals the district court’s order requiring the return of certain property pursuant to Rule 41(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The government makes three contentions: first, that the district court erred by holding that the search warrants which commanded seizure of the property were overbroad; second, that even if the warrants were over-broad, the district court should have denied the Rule 41(e) motion based on the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule; and third, that the district court should have applied the inevitable discovery doctrine and permitted the government to keep the property even if the seizure was il legal. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S. C. § 3731. We affirm.

I

FACTS

As part of an investigation of suspected mail and wire fraud involving the sale of forged Salvador Dali artwork, federal agents executed search warrants at six locations under the control of Center Art Galleries-Hawaii. The searches lasted from twelve to fourteen hours. Federal agents seized a total of five truckloads of documents, artwork and other property.

Following the seizures, William Mett and Center Art Galleries (collectively “CAG”) filed a motion…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.