us-constitution search-and-seizure damages fourth-amendment
Are there standards for detention of property in connection with a search warrant?
<p>We know that <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/a/201/10">police and government are not liable for damage caused in the course of warranted searches</a>.  We also know that <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/11382/search-warrant-against-third-party">people who are not suspected of any crime can have their property searched and seized pursuant to a warrant</a>.</p>

<p><strong>Are there any enumerated rights to the <em>speedy return</em> of property seized for evidence, or for <em>compensation</em> when police detain property for so long that the owner incurs damages?</strong></p>

<p>As <a href="https://www.eff.org/issues/know-your-rights" rel="nofollow noreferrer">an increasingly common example</a>: Police can seize entire computer systems.  There are all sorts of constitutionally-derived safeguards to ensure that the seizure and search are "proper."  But I can't find <em>any</em> law or custom pertaining to <em>how long the police can keep</em> a computer, phone, or data storage device.  And I <em>have</em> heard that they will routinely keep such items for weeks or months.  When the computer(s) seized are someone's work machines then that person not only loses time and money to replace them, but may also incur damages due to the inability to access data that wasn't backed up offsite.</p>

<p>(<em>Why</em> the police do this with information systems is bewildering to a techie with some IS security background like me.  Until I was shown some real-life cases to the contrary, my understanding was that SOP for data drives is to get them <a href="https://www.digitalintelligence.com/products/forensic_duplicator_2/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">duplicated</a> immediately.  At that point a duplicate could certainly be returned to the owner without imperiling the search of the data, or its use as evidence.)</p>

<p>The indefinite detention of movable property seems incongruous with the treatment afforded to dwellings.  E.g., I have never heard of a <em>residence</em> being seized for search and cordoned off <em>for the duration of an investigation and prosecution</em>.  Instead, CSI is brought in for at most a few days, and once they decide they've done their job it's opened back up to the owner.</p>

<p>Everything I've found so far suggests the answer is "the government can keep your property as long as it thinks it should."  <a href="http://www.legal-aid.org/en/ineedhelp/ineedhelp/criminalproblem/faq/howdoigetmystuffback.aspx" rel="nofollow">The following explanation is typical</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>If your property is being held as evidence, the property clerk will
  require a release from the district attorney, as well as a voucher and
  proper identification for you or your claimant. A release is a short
  letter from the district attorney stating that he does not need the
  property as evidence. You can obtain a release directly from the
  district attorney while your criminal case is pending or when it is
  over. However, although your case is no longer in court, there may be
  a long delay in obtaining a release if the case is being appealed,
  reheard by a grand jury or adjourned in contemplation of dismissal
  (ACD). In these cases, ask your attorney if an earlier property
  release can be arranged. The district attorney must respond in writing
  to your request for a release within 15 days. If you are denied a
  release, you are entitled to a written explanation of why your
  property is being held and review of an unfavorable decision by a
  supervising district attorney. The most common reasons for not
  releasing property are that the case is not completely over, the
  property is contraband, or there is an ongoing criminal investigation
  about its source.</p>
  
  <p>In the case of a car impounded as evidence, the prosecutor must obtain
  an order from a judge authorizing impoundment for that reason. A
  person has the right to a hearing in criminal court to challenge such
  an order.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It does seem odd that cars get special treatment, but there is no requirement that copies of data (that are not contraband) be returned immediately.  Perhaps the law on this has yet to join the Information Age.  (And cloud backups already obviate it to a large extent.)</p>
