Legal Opinion

United States v. Forte

District Court, W.D. New York

Decided January 30, 2006No. 6:05-cv-06066Published

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION AND ORDER

SIRAGUSA, District Judge.

INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion to suppress tangible evidence. In that regard, an evidentiary hearing was held, at which one witness, Rochester Police Officer Carlos Santory, testified. Additionally, certain exhibits were received into evidence. The Court has now had a chance to consider both the testimony and exhibits. For the reasons discussed below, defendant’s application to suppress is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

On February 2, 2005, Officer Carlos Santory was employed by the City of Rochester Police Department…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Brinegar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  5. United States v. CortezSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API