Judge denies Mike Lindell’s plea to get his phone back after FBI Hardee seizure

Judge denies Mike Lindell’s plea to get his phone back after FBI Hardee seizure

A federal judge has denied MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s request to have his phone returned to him a week after the FBI seized it at a Hardee drive-thru.

Trump-appointed District Court Judge Eric Tostrud denied Lindell’s request to stop the FBI from searching his phone as part of an investigation into alleged tampering with voting machines in Colorado.

Lindell was asking for a temporary restraining order that would prevent the FBI from “taking any action.” Judge Tostrud ruled that Lindell’s evidence did not prove that his rights were violated and said that the pillow expert failed to provide the appropriate answers or evidence to the legal questions required to make such a request.

The motion was brought by Lindell’s attorney, Alan Dershowitz, who told Law and Crime’s Sidebar channel that while he “agrees with [Lindell] very little,” he believes it is “critically important for people on my side of the political fence, the Biden supporters, to hold the Justice Department accountable for trying to attack our political enemies.”

In his filing, Lindell said the Justice Department’s warrant and seizure method to obtain the phone was a violation of his First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights. However, Judge Tostrud ruled that a temporary restraining order is an “extraordinary remedy.” He said that “in the absence of an obvious answer” to Rule 41g, which refers to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g), he could not approve the order. The rule states that “the court must receive evidence on any question of fact necessary to decide the motion.”

Judge Tostrud said that “it would be overkill to award relief on the basis of this rule when the moving parties nowhere explain how the rule’s procedural framework and substantive standards support the request.”

Read More :   Prince Harry considered hiring a mediator for the royal family, says a book

He continued: “Whether Rule 41(g) requires the return of the cell phone is not obvious, and that is understating things.”

The judge also noted Wednesday’s ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that vacated and significantly reworded Judge Aileen Cannon’s injunction regarding the approximately 100 classified-marked documents seized from the Mar-A-Lago residence. of former President Donald Trump. Justice Tostrud noted similarities in the Trump case:

“[W]When the owner of seized property requests injunctive relief for the return of the property while the case remains in the investigation stage (i.e., before criminal charges are filed), the district court must also weigh the government’s interest in retain the property against the owner’s right to obtain it back.”

Tostrud ultimately ordered Lindell’s side to “contact the court for a hearing date.” A schedule of briefings will then be established, he said.

Lindell has not been charged with any crime.

Source : www.thedailybeast.com

You May Also Like

About the Author: Pierre Cohen

A person who has expertise in politics and writes articles to fill his spare time as a hobby.