You are here

Opinions

Below is a list of opinions specially selected for public release by judges in the district.  For a detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.

Note:  This database does not contain all decisions issued by all judges and is not intended to replace PACER or other more comprehensive case law sites.  The PACER system provides a report of written opinions as defined by the Judicial Conference.  Access to both the report and the opinions is free.  In order to access court records via PACER you must have a PACER account.  For PACER access and online registration, please click here.

17-CR-212 USA v. Gohil

Statement of reason for imposing sentencing.

Judge:
Date:
Thursday, September 6, 2018

14-CR-20 USA v. Sweeney

Statement of Reason Memorandum for Imposing Sentence.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, September 4, 2018

17-CR-137 USA v. Rodriguez

Statement of Reason Memorandum for Imposing Sentence.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, September 4, 2018

18-CR-81 USA v. Goss

Statement of Reason Memorandum for Imposing Sentence.

Judge:
Date:
Tuesday, September 4, 2018

17-CR-201 USA v. Polnitz

Order Adopting In Part Report and Recommendation Granting In Part Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Statements, and Denying Defendant’s Amended Motion to Suppress Physical Evidence

The defendant asked the court to suppress statements he made prior to receiving his Miranda warnings, and asked the court to suppress physical evidence obtained as a result of his wife's consent to the search of their home. He argued that he was in custody at the time he made the statements, starting with statements he made after voluntarily coming out onto the porch of his home in response to officers' request and continuing during the walk from the porch to the squad car and while in the squad car. He also argued that his wife's consent was presumptively involuntary, because police obtained that consent while the defendant himself was illegally detained. The court found that the defendant was not in custody while on his porch, despite being in handcuffs, but that he was in custody when officers walked him to the squad car and placed him inside. The court granted the defendant's motion to suppress statements made during the walk and in the squad car. The court denied the motion to suppress physical evidence, finding that the defendant was not illegally detained, and that even had he been, that detention would not have given rise to a presumption that his wife's consent was involuntary.

Judge:
Date:
Thursday, July 19, 2018

Pages