U.S. v. York, 1:16-cr-00069-LJO-SKO. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20180216792
Visitors: 13
Filed: Feb. 15, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 15, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT MONSON'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS WIRETAPS AND VACATING HEARING (ECF No. 516) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . The Court has reviewed Defendant Monson's second motion for reconsideration of its order denying Defendants' motions to suppress the results of the wiretap interceptions in this case (ECF No. 516), the Government's opposition (ECF No. 539), and Defendant's reply (ECF No. 540). Several co-defendants joined the motio
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT MONSON'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS WIRETAPS AND VACATING HEARING (ECF No. 516) LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . The Court has reviewed Defendant Monson's second motion for reconsideration of its order denying Defendants' motions to suppress the results of the wiretap interceptions in this case (ECF No. 516), the Government's opposition (ECF No. 539), and Defendant's reply (ECF No. 540). Several co-defendants joined the motion..
More
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT MONSON'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS WIRETAPS AND VACATING HEARING (ECF No. 516)
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
The Court has reviewed Defendant Monson's second motion for reconsideration of its order denying Defendants' motions to suppress the results of the wiretap interceptions in this case (ECF No. 516), the Government's opposition (ECF No. 539), and Defendant's reply (ECF No. 540). Several co-defendants joined the motion. The Fresno Police Department report that forms the basis of Defendant's motion does not add anything to what was previously known, and therefore does not alter the Court's reasoning in its previous orders. See ECF Nos. 456, 492. Moreover, Defendant's argument that the absence of a statement about "pimping out" a female officer in the police report undermines probable cause is incorrect because, as the Court previously indicated, there "was still sufficient probable cause to intercept Monson's communications even excluding his alleged statement about `pimping out' a female officer." See ECF No. 492 at 3 n.3.
The motion is DENIED and the hearing, currently set for February 26, 2018 is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
