Is Petitioner entitled to the return of property taken as evidence without a warrant and held in custodia-legis subsequent to a motion-to-suppress in regards to that evidence having been granted by the trial court on the grounds that the search resulting in the seizure of said evidence was illegal, with the motion-to-suppress specifically having demanded the return of the property?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Is Petitioner entitled to the return of property taken as evidence without a warrant and held in __ eustodia legis subsequent to a motion to suppress in regards to that evidence having been granted by : the trial court on the grounds that the search resulting in the seizure of said evidence was illegal, with the motion to suppress specifically having demanded the return of the property? Is Petitioner entitled to the return of property taken as evidence and held in custodia legis subsequent to the case having been terminated by a nolle prosequi, it being the Petitioner's personal property, not the fruit of criminal activity, and it not being held as evidence in Petitioner's or in any related case, and Petitioner having filed a motion for the return? Is Petitioner entitled to an evidentiary hearing in the trial court if the property is not returned, and if the trial court refuses to hear such a motion to the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the trial judge to exercise jurisdiction and order the return of the property or to entertain motion for same? Is the existence of a Disposition of Case and Evidence Memorandum directing the evidence custodian to return the property which is ambiguous and unclear in nature regarding the exact items to be returned sufficient to supersede Petitioner's rights to a hearing for the return of her property if Petitioner has been able to prove through law enforcement property receipts from the time of seizure and a release for returned property / evidence form that it has not resulted in the return of all or even most of the property entered into custodia legis? Is Petitioner entitled to an evidentiary hearing if the State and evidence custodian make claims about the status of the property which Petitioner has brought into question by valid timely argument? Is the fact that the evidence custodian has not returned Petitioner's property in response to a Disposition of Case and Evidence Memorandum and has not provided any evidence to the court in regards to the missing property (non-performance in response to a lawful order) sufficient proof that the property has ceased to exist and therefore grounds for Petitioner's petition for writ of mandamus to be denied as moot? If the evidence custodian does not comply with a Disposition of Case and Evidence Memorandum does this permit Petitioner to petition the court by motion to intervene to achieve compliance? If the evidence custodian were to make a claim of the property having ceased to exist would the evidence custodian be required to give a detailed accounting of the circumstances of loss for each item in order for the court to determine the veracity of that claim and to enable Petitioner to possibly take civil action against the evidence custodian? If the evidence custodian were to make a claim that it can no longer locate property entered into custodia legis is it the duty of the trial court which took possession of the property to initiate an investigation and elicit testimony from the evidence custodian in order to locate the property? If the evidence custodian has disposed of property it was holding in custodia legis without the authority of the court by means which resulted in the continued existence of the property such as sale, donation, adoption, or any other temporary or permanent custody arrangement, is it the responsibility of the court to compel the evidence custodian to retrieve such property so it can be restored to Petitioner? 4 ‘ |