Skip navigation

Muhammed v. Drug Enforcement Agency, No. 95-3194 (8th Cir.) (92 F.3d 648) (August 8, 1996) (Judge C. Arlen Beam)

While the government's failure to approve the DEA's seizure in this case turned on the lack of adequate notice to the claimants, the facts are illustrative of the Court's view that no undue deference should be afforded to drug-alerts by dogs to large amounts of cash, in the absence of ...

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login