Legal Opinion
United States v. Stinson
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided July 20, 1994No. 3:94CR00050 (AHN)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON MOTION TO SUPPRESS TESTIMONY RELATING TO ARREST
NEVAS, District Judge.
The defendants, George Robinson (“Robinson”) and Michael Stinson (“Stinson”), are charged in a one-count indictment with robbery of a United States postal station clerk in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2114. Presently pending is Stinson’s motion to suppress all testimony relating to his arrest at 1281 State Street, Bridgeport, Connecticut, pursuant to Rules 12(b)(3), 41(f), Fed.R.Crim.P. For the reasons that follow, this motion [doc. # 21] is DENIED. 1
FACTS 2
On March 17, a grand jury sitting in Bridgeport, Connecticut,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Steagald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Segura v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Tyson v. WillauerDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
- Commonwealth v. GentileMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
- Cogswell v. County of Suffolk Deputy Sheriff's Dept.District Court, E.D. New York · 2005
- Tyson v. WillauerDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
- United States v. LuckeyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.