From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Sperow

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 27, 2014
581 F. App'x 641 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

Submitted June 25, 2014

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. D.C. No. 3:96-cr-00058-JO. Robert E. Jones, District Judge, Presiding.

For United States of America, Plaintiff - Appellee: Johnathan S. Haub, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR; Kelly A. Zusman, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of The U.S. Attorney, Portland, OR.

Gregory Frank Sperow, AKA: Gregory Frank Spero, Defendant - Appellant, Pro se, San Pedro, CA.


Before: HAWKINS, TALLMAN, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Gregory Frank Sperow appeals pro se from the district court's September 10, 2013, order declaring its 2008 order for the return of Sperow's property complied with or, in the alternative, moot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Contrary to Sperow's contention, the record reflects that, following Sperow's conviction in Oregon, his property was either transferred to Idaho for use in his criminal prosecution there or returned to federal officials in California. In his September 9, 2013, declaration to the district court, Assistant United States Attorney (" AUSA" ) for the District of Oregon Johnathan Haub described his efforts to locate any property remaining in Oregon, and stated his belief that there was no longer any evidence belonging to Sperow in the District of Oregon, and that he had no control over the property that was outside of the District of Oregon. On these facts, we conclude that the district court did not err in declaring that its 2008 order regarding the return of Sperow's property had been complied with by the Oregon AUSA to the extent reasonably possible. We, accordingly, affirm the district court. Our disposition is without prejudice to Sperow filing a new request for return of his otherwise non-forfeited, non-contraband property in his criminal case in Idaho or any other appropriate venue.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Sperow

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jun 27, 2014
581 F. App'x 641 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

United States v. Sperow

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GREGORY FRANK SPEROW…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 27, 2014

Citations

581 F. App'x 641 (9th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

United States v. Sperow

The court found that "his property was transferred to Idaho for use in his criminal prosecution there or…