US supreme court to hear Bob Nersesian's case

Awesome! Is Bob going to argue the case? I love a good jurisdictional issue...

The agents may have been based in Georgia and the search and seizure took place in Georgia, but the item in question originated in Nevada, would be subject to the laws of Nevada and all information about the item's origins would be answered by persons living and working in Nevada or actions that took place in Nevada. Nothing about the funds changes when they reach another state. The most sensible forum for resolving all questions is Nevada, not the various courts that might get involved as funds are transported to other jurisdictions.

It is similar to a Habeas Corpus proceeding, wherein application for the writ is not made to a court where a person is being detained, but is instead made to the court that has jurisdiction over the person claiming to be lawfully detaining the individual irrespective of where the person is being detained or where the circumstances for his detention initially arose.

A Nevada court is the proper forum for determining the disposition of funds that have boarded a plane in Nevada rather than a plethora of other courts that might later try to hear such cases and have to re-apply rules and procedures unique to Nevada, since the legality of the items is determined at boarding and not by later travels.

the article failed to tell us how this couple was able to leave Vegas with 97,000....they can look forward to audits for years to come

So let me get this straight. They were SWITCHING planes in Atlanta, which means they had already cleared TSA security at a previous airport. If this was really suspicion of drug money why didn't the first airport he flew out of that day confiscate it? This also happened back in 2006, whatever happened to the right to a speedy trial?

this is a jurisdictional issue.....money was returned years ago. Reread article Gabes22

I understand the money was returned years ago, but still he cleared security at an airport and was merely switching planes, meaning he already cleared security. Furthermore, the article makes no mention of when or why the money was returned, whether it was court ordered or if the investigation was dropped. The fact that this case still isn't resolved after 7 years is a complete and utter joke.

N.B. The trip in question originated in San Juan, where the two were cleared with absolutely no problem.

Side question: Is Walden, the D.E.A. agent who the federal prosecutor says lied under oath, still at the agency and, if so, why?

Quote: teddys

Awesome! Is Bob going to argue the case? I love a good jurisdictional issue...

I learned of the supreme court taking the case through Richard Munchkin. This was also my first question. Richard seems to think that Bob will present the argument.

I would feel more comfortable with Bob presenting the argument than I would with Nareed making the judgement. If she has predetermined she doesn't like the defendants, the truth or the facts will not matter to her one iota.

Does Bob have any SC experience? I remember an episoode
of Boston Legal where they had to be tutored by a crew of
people before they went before the Supremes. Its not
like regular court at all. The judges just want to hear your
facts, not a lot of blustering and opinions. And they can
interupt you constantly asking for clarifications. Its very
daunting.

Appellate courts are typically not like trial courts; the issues are distilled and clear, the attorneys are reasonably polished, and arguments are often "timed" by the tribunal.

Of course, as the case originated out of the 9th Circuit, a reversal would almost have to be expected, as the court is considered somewhat of a rogue court, much more liberal than the mainstream.

Quote: MrV

Of course, as the case originated out of the 9th Circuit, .

Rush Limbaugh calls the 9th circuit court the 9th circus
court, with good reason. There are some real loons there.

Its Justices, not judges.
Cases start off with a jurisdictional pathway statement that is short and direct, since the court has original jurisdiction is so few areas. One lawyer forgot this and when he went directly into his argument the court asked but how did you get here and he replied by railroad.
Yes, interruptions are common, often right of the bat. Its a time for argument not speechmaking by the attorneys.

I would expect the case to be argued by Neserian even if he is not yet admitted to the Scotus Bar. The Photos and certificates always look good on a wall, no matter where the office is located.

It is largely a dispute on jurisdiction and when rules are different in differing circuits and the situation is likely to repeat itself then the Supreme Court is more likely to grant Certiori.

Quote: kewlj

http://news.yahoo.com/u-justices-agree-hear-dispute-over-gamblers-seized-150622942.html

"Their winnings were eventually returned."

so why is this case going to the US Supreme court?
are the Feds trying to appeal?

The issue is to get the Supreme Court to clarify for the benefit of the lower courts just which court should have jurisdiction in seizing items such as currency which are found amongst travelers and are capable of having defenses asserted that relate to a particular geography. Asset Forfeiture is big business, thats often why drug laws are enforced.

Quote: Gabes22

So let me get this straight. They were SWITCHING planes in Atlanta, which means they had already cleared TSA security at a previous airport. If this was really suspicion of drug money why didn't the first airport he flew out of that day confiscate it? This also happened back in 2006, whatever happened to the right to a speedy trial?

You do have a right to a speedy trial, but normally defendants waive it. Back when I was reading a NOLO Press book to fight a ticket, I learned they have a secret lingo to trick people into giving it up. If you're ever fighting a ticket or in court, the judge will ask you if you
"waive time" which means waving your right to a speedy trial. So many people were saying yes having no idea what it meant.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Waiving+Time

It's pretty pathetic that judges have to resort to insider jargon to con people into giving up their rights. I haven't had to deal a lot with court proceedings. Heck when I got pulled over and didn't have a current insurance card in my car (although I had expired ones going back 6 years) I thought it was pathetic I had to wait six weeks to go to court to bring my insurance card which was on my kitchen counter. Especially considering that in Illinois the officer confiscates your license until you pay your fine/get it removed.

Neresian's brief in opposition is available here.

It's important to realize that the merits of the case are not at issue here at all. The money was seized and returned, and Nersesian subsequently filed a lawsuit for damages against the agent under a so-called "Bivens" action, which gives a legal cause of action to those whose Fourth Amendment rights are violated by federal agents. The government claimed lack of personal jurisdiction right away and the Nevada case was dismissed. Then the Ninth Circuit said, "No, you were wrong, Nevada does have jurisdiction to hear this case." Then the government petitioned the Supreme Court for writ of certiorari, which was granted. The merits of the case have not been heard at all!

That said, the Supreme Court must have some interest in clearing the air about how much power District Courts have to reach out and "grab someone" into court when the actions took place in another state. It's a very interesting question and Bob has some tough defending to do.

Quote: teddys

Neresian's brief in opposition is available here.

So the San Juan police go thru their luggage, find no
drugs, satisfy themselves the money came from gambling,
and still they call the Atlanta DEA and warn them? What a
bunch of Gestapo crap. Then some hotshot DEA agent harasses
them and brings in a dog who raises one paw on a piece
of luggage, after the luggage had already been contaminated
from being with other luggage in a cargo bay, and that was
enough to grab the money.

Then when the people get an attorney, he's lies thru his ass
about what really happened. Charming. Its so nice to know what
the gov't will go thru just to get their hands on our money..

I had a friend in Denver who owned an antique business. This was in the late 1990's and he got profiled for buying a one way ticket at the airport and paying cash. He had over $30,000 in cash on him. He was going to auctions on Florida. Took him over 3 years to get his money back.

As for this case, the link below goes into great detail.

http://lawreview.law.lsu.edu/2013/03/04/fiore-v-walden-the-ninth-circuits-apparent-expansion-of-personal-jurisdictions-minimum-contacts-requirement

Whats bothersome is the DEA knows full well that
pro gamblers carry a lot of money. They know it better
than we do, they deal with it day in and day out. And
the agent still went ahead with it after they had already
been cleared by another US airport. San Juan has the
same rules of procedure as we do in the States, they
are part of the US.