Legal Opinion
United States v. Camacho
District Court, S.D. Florida
Decided May 25, 1990No. 89-650-CRPublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
MARCUS, District Judge.
This Cause has come before the Court upon Defendants’ Motion to Suppress Statements filed on February 7, 1990. For the reasons set forth below, Defendants’ Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
I
The Defendants Pablo Camacho, Charlie Haynes, Ronald Sinclair, Thomas Trujillo, Nathaniel Veal, Jr. and Andy Watson, members of the Street Narcotics Unit of the Miami Police Department, have been charged under Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242 with violating the civil rights of Leonardo Mercado. These charges arise out of an incident occurring on the evening of December…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- California v. BehelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Minnesota v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- United States v. VealCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Levette VangatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
- People v. SappSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- United States v. SloughDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- In Re Federal Grand Jury Proceedings (Fgj 91-9), Ronald Cohen, in Re Federal Grand Jury Proceedings (Fgj 91-9), Nathaniel Veal, Charlie Haynes, Andy Watson, Intervenors-Appellants. In Re Federal Grand Jury Proceedings (Fgj 91-9), Robert KlausnerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.