Filed: Nov. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO SUPPRESS [200, 201] LAURIE J. MICHELSON , District Judge . Defendants Javier Robles, Miguel Garcia, and David Garcia have been indicted for conspiring to traffic in controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841, 846. ( See R. 110, PageID.349-350.) Robles and Miguel Garcia (but not David) have also been indicated for conspiring to launder monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956(a), (h). ( See R. 110, PageID.351.)
Summary: ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO SUPPRESS [200, 201] LAURIE J. MICHELSON , District Judge . Defendants Javier Robles, Miguel Garcia, and David Garcia have been indicted for conspiring to traffic in controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841, 846. ( See R. 110, PageID.349-350.) Robles and Miguel Garcia (but not David) have also been indicated for conspiring to launder monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956(a), (h). ( See R. 110, PageID.351.) O..
More
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO SUPPRESS [200, 201]
LAURIE J. MICHELSON, District Judge.
Defendants Javier Robles, Miguel Garcia, and David Garcia have been indicted for conspiring to traffic in controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846. (See R. 110, PageID.349-350.) Robles and Miguel Garcia (but not David) have also been indicated for conspiring to launder monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a), (h). (See R. 110, PageID.351.)
On the eve of trial, it came to light that some of the Government's evidence against the Defendants in this case might be derivative of certain Riverside County, California wiretaps. As reported by the media, the legality of these wiretaps have come into question. See e.g., Brad Heath and Brett Kelman, Justice Officials Fear Nation's Biggest Wiretap Operation May Not be Legal, Nov. 11, 2015, available at https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/11/dea-wiretap-operation-riverside-california/75484076/.
Defendants thus moved to suppress evidence. Via joint motion, Robles and David Garcia argued that the wiretaps were unlawfully issued and that any evidence derived from the wiretaps must be suppressed. (See generally R. 200, 216, 230, 232.) Miguel Garcia, via his own motion to suppress, joined Robles and David Garcia's motion. (R. 201, PageID.875.)
Over the course of several days, the Court conducted a hearing on the Defendants' motions. The hearing included testimony from Special Agent Chad Hermans, Special Agent Austin Roseberry, and Frank Scartozzi, a Financial Analyst Investigator. (R. 226, 227.) The Court also reviewed a summary of Special Agent Paul Tajii's interview and a summary of Pasadena Police Corporal Robert Dubois' interview. (R. 229.) The Court also heard oral argument. And it reviewed the parties' supplemental briefs. (R. 216, 217, 229, 230, 231, 232.) Having been fully advised, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants' motions (R. 200, 201) as explained in detail on the record on November 16, 2018.
SO ORDERED.
