the court should hold an evidentiary hearing on remand, require the government to provide the copied material for the court’s review in assessing the legitimacy of the government’s interest in continued possession of the material, and make appropriate findings. See Fed. R.Crim.P. 41(g) (“The court must receive evidence on any factual issue necessary to decide the motion.”); see also United States v. Willson, 8 Fed.Appx. 593, 595-96 (8th Cir.2001) (unpublished per curiam) (concluding that where parties disputed the nature of documents and the only evidence on the matter before the district court was an inventory noting that “drug notes” were destroyed, court erred in not receiving evidence as to destroyed documents); United States v. Felici, 208 F.3d 667, 670-71 (8th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1201, 121 S.Ct. 1209,
holding that violation of state law was not a per se constitutional violation holding that news broadcast which fell within several of the historical categories for per se defamation was not defamatory per se where plaintiffs identity was not shown on its face holding receiving stolen property is per se dishonest holding that district court erred in denying return of derivative contraband which was not contraband per se without first receiving evidence holding hearing in chambers was not per se a violation of due process