From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Thompson

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 1, 2017
No. 17-2194 (8th Cir. Dec. 1, 2017)

Opinion

No. 17-2194

12-01-2017

United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. David Byron Thompson Defendant - Appellant


Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Harrison [Unpublished] Before SHEPHERD, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Federal prisoner David Thompson appeals after the district court denied his Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g) motion seeking the return of property. After careful review of the record, we conclude that Thompson's Rule 41(g) motion--which he concedes sought the same property as he requested in a prior Rule 41(g) motion--was barred by res judicata. See Rutherford v. Kessel, 560 F.3d 874, 877 (8th Cir. 2009) (elements of res judicata); Followell v. United States, 532 F.3d 707, 708 (8th Cir. 2008) (res judicata precludes relitigation of claim on grounds that were raised or could have been raised in prior action). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

The Honorable P. K. Holmes, III, Chief Judge for the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. --------


Summaries of

United States v. Thompson

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 1, 2017
No. 17-2194 (8th Cir. Dec. 1, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Thompson

Case Details

Full title:United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. David Byron Thompson…

Court:United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

Date published: Dec 1, 2017

Citations

No. 17-2194 (8th Cir. Dec. 1, 2017)

Citing Cases

United States v. Bala

On the other hand, res judicata does bar successive Rule 41(g) motions for return of the same property.…