United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Y. Aanstad, United States Attorney's Office, for
Bilaal Muhammad Arafat, MCFP Springfield, pro se.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
RICHARD NELSON United States District Judge.
the Court is Defendant Sheikh Bilaal Muhammad Arafat's
pro se Motion for Return of Seized Property [Doc. No. 533]
(“Def.'s Mot.”), brought pursuant to Fed. R.
Crim. P. 41(g). Arafat contends that he is entitled to the
return of various items lawfully seized by the government in
the course of investigating a series of bank robberies, for
which he ultimately pled guilty. (See Def.'s
Mot. at 1-2.) Although Arafat is unable to recall exactly
what items the government has in its possession, he states
that-at minimum-he is entitled to return of the following
items seized from his possession:
1. Apple iPhone;
2. Sony Camera (black in color);
3. Black Ferragamo leather bag (with personal contents);
4. Black TUMI leather bag (with personal contents including
5. Clothing and personal shoes and boots;
6. Black (bi-fold) leather wallet with personal contents;
7. Tan-colored leather bag with several paper documents;
8. Multiple jackets/coats; and
9. Other personal effects, including a set of keys.
41(g) authorizes a person whose property is seized by the
government to petition the district court for its
return.” Jackson v. United States, 526 F.3d
394, 396 (8th Cir. 2008). The burden lies on the movant to
establish lawful entitlement to the property. Id.
This burden is “often satisfied by showing that the
property was seized from the movant's possession.”
Id. At that point, the burden shifts to the
government to establish a legitimate reason to retain the
property-for instance because the property is contraband or
subject to forfeiture, or because the ...