In a prosecution for drug-related offenses, grant of defendant’s motion to suppress evidence stemming from a protective sweep is affirmed where: 1) district court did not commit clear legal error as the court employed the correct legal standard in asking whether a warrant would have been sought if what actually happened had not occurred; 2) court did not commit clear factual error in concluding that the government did not establish that the agents were not prompted to seek the search warrant by information acquired during an unlawful protective sweep; and 3) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying government’s motion to reconsider as the language of the court’s order suggests that it did consider all of the arguments.
Read US v. Siciliano, No. 08-1745
Appellate Information
Appeal from the United State District Court for the District of MassachusettsDecided August 26, 2009
Judges
Before Boudin, Lipez, and Stahl, Circuit Judges. Opinion by Lipez, Circuit Judge.
Counsel
For Appellant: Randall E. Kromm, Assistant United States Attorney, Michael J. Sullivan, United States Attorney.
For Appellee: Robert M. Strasnick, Andrews & Updegraph, P.C.
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
