Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Lauderdale

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


October 31, 2007

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
RONNIE LAUDERDALE, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

On May 1, 2007, Lauderdale was arraigned and given 21 days to file motions (Doc. 19). That date passed without any filing. On August 3, 2007, the Court granted an extension for the defendant to file motions until October 5, 2007 (Doc. 32). At that time, the Court set jury trial for December 10, 2007. The Court also set a hearing for November 16, 2007 to address all pending motions in the case. However, the October 5, 2007 deadline to file motions passed without any filings. On October 29, 2007, defense counsel filed two motions to suppress (Docs. 36 and 37), twenty-four days late.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(C) requires that motions to suppress evidence be filed before trial. Rule 12(c) allows the Court to set a deadline for the parties to file pre-trial motions, including motions to suppress, and permits the Court to set a motion hearing. Under Rule 12(e), however, "A party waives any Rule 12(b)(3) defense, objection, or request not raised by the deadline the court sets under Rule 12(c) or by any extension the court provides. For good cause, the court may grant relief from the waiver." See United States v. Charleston, 63 Fed.Appx. 951, 952-53 (7th Cir. 2003) (unpublished).

Here, the Court set a deadline for pre-trial motions under Rule 12(c), and the defendant failed to meet that deadline. He has thereby waived any Rule 12(b)(3) defenses or objections, unless the Court permits such filing upon a showing of good cause. No such showing has been made in the pending motions to suppress evidence.

Additionally, late filing makes it impossible to meet the current hearing date of November 16, 2007 or to proceed to trial by December 10, 2007. The defendant has had two continuances in this case, and complained that his speedy trial rights were violated in a previous case based upon the same facts (Case number 06-30142). Further delay is not warranted absent a showing of good cause, and no such showing has been attempted here.

Accordingly, the Court DENIES defendant's motions to suppress (Docs. 36 and 37) as untimely. Jury trial remains set for December 10, 2007, and the final pre-trial hearing remains set for November 16, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL J. REAGAN United States District Judge

20071031

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.