Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Douglas, 16-20436. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20180810995 Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 08, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' PRETRIAL MOTIONS DAVID M. LAWSON , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on several motions by the defendants to dismiss the indictment, suppress evidence, and for certain other relief. The Court has reviewed the submissions of the parties and heard oral argument on August 7, 2018. During the course of the hearing the Court announced from the bench its decisions with respect to each of the motions. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that defendant Shirley
More

ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' PRETRIAL MOTIONS

This matter is before the Court on several motions by the defendants to dismiss the indictment, suppress evidence, and for certain other relief. The Court has reviewed the submissions of the parties and heard oral argument on August 7, 2018. During the course of the hearing the Court announced from the bench its decisions with respect to each of the motions.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that defendant Shirley Douglas's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment [128] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Douglas's motion to suppress information obtained via an order issued under the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2703(d) [129] is GRANTED for the reasons stated on the record, and all cell-site location data from defendant Douglas's cell phone that was obtained by the government via an order issued under section 2703(d) is EXCLUDED from use at the trial in this matter.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Douglas's motion in limine requesting a pretrial evidentiary hearing on the admissibility of co-conspirator statements [168] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record. The Court advises the parties that it conditionally will permit the government to introduce evidence of co-conspirator statements at trial subject to any appropriate contemporaneous objection. At the close of the proofs the Court will make a determination whether the government has advanced sufficient proofs to establish the admissibility of those statements and entertain a motion for a mistrial if it finds that the requisite proofs are lacking.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Douglas's motions to suppress [130, 131] are taken under advisement and the Court will issue a written decision on those motions in due course.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Malik Fuqua's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment based on violations of the scheduling order [137] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Fuqua's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment for multiplicity and on other grounds [139] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Fuqua's motion to dismiss the superseding indictment based on the government's alleged failure to disclose exculpatory information [140] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Fuqua's motion for a bill of particulars [141] is DENIED for the reasons stated on the record.

It is further ORDERED that defendant Fuqua's motion to dismiss for vagueness and on other grounds [138] is taken under advisement and the Court will issue a written decision on that motion in due course.

It is further ORDERED with respect to defendant Douglas's purported joinder in defendant Fuqua's motions [172] that the rulings of the Court with respect to defendant Douglas are the same as those announced by the Court on the record and set forth in this order with respect to defendant Fuqua, and in all other respects defendant Douglas's joinder is STRICKEN.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer