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. Saucedo

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION


November 22, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARGARITO SAUCEDO, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills, U.S. District Judge

ORDER

Defendant Margarito Saucedo has filed a motion to suppress [d/e 31], contending that his rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution were violated. In a Report and Recommendation [d/e 33] entered on November 3, 2010, United States Magistrate Judge Byron G. Cudmore recommended that the Defendant's motion be denied. The Defendant has filed Objections [d/e 36] to the Report and Recommendation.

The Defendant asserts that the stop of his vehicle was unlawful. He seeks to suppress (1) any and all physical, oral, tangible or intangible evidence; (2) any admissions or statements obtained during his detention and (3) the subsequent search of his vehicle.

In addition to the Report and Recommendation and the Objections thereto, the Court has reviewed the Defendant's motion to suppress and the Government's response. Because Illinois State Trooper Nathan Miller had probable cause to believe that a violation of Illinois traffic law had occurred, the stop of the vehicle did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Based on the totality of circumstances, the Court agrees with the finding in the Report and Recommendation that the Defendant volunteered his consent to search the trailer and the tractor. Moreover, the Defendant placed no limitations on the scope of his consent.

To the extent that the Defendant argues that his statements were not voluntary, the Court concludes that the magistrate judge properly rejected this argument. The record reveals that the Defendant understood his rights under Miranda and voluntarily chose to speak to Trooper Miller.

The Court concludes that the Defendant's Objections to Judge Cudmore's Report and Recommendation are without merit. The Defendant's motion to suppress will be denied.

Ergo, the Court hereby ADOPTS Judge Cudmore's Report and Recommendation [d/e 33]. The Defendant's motion to suppress [d/e 31] is DENIED.

Upon reviewing the Defendant's Disclosure [d/e 35], the Court hereby sets this matter for a final pretrial conference on December 21, 2010, at 1:30 p.m. The jury trial will commence on January 4, 2011. Pursuant to the parties' consent, Judge Cudmore will select the jury at 9:30 a.m. on January 4. The parties are directed to submit an agreed statement of the case and any proposed, specialized voir dire to Judge Cudmore by December 27, 2010. Opening statements will commence at 1:30 p.m. on January 4.

Richard Mills United States District Judge

20101122

© 1992-2010 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.