STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, ss CRINIINAL ACTION DOCKET NO. CR-08r955 /:!/7/) " " /,1 ~/
STATE OF MAINE c ,_.~"" '~, .~ \ / . . , ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S \
v. MOTION TO SUPPRESS
EMMANUEL REYNOLDS
Defendant
The defendant seeks to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a bail search.
For the following reasons, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
FINDINGS
On 12/16/08, Winslow Police Officer Nathan Walker was on patrol on
Monument Street in Winslow when he noticed the defendant driving a motor vehicle
with a female passenger. Officer Walker was familiar with the defendant and knew he
was on bail for assault with conditions of random search and testing of the defendant's
person, vehicle, and residence for illegal drugs and alcohol. (State's Ex. 1.) Officer
Walker stopped the defendant's vehicle for a bail check just after 9:00 p.m. The
defendant agreed to go to the police station for a search. The defendant rode with the
officer in the back seat of the cruiser. The defendant was not restrained or handcuffed.
Maine State Police Trooper Derrick Record also responded to the scene, stood by during
the traffic stop, and followed Officer Walker to the police station. He assisted based on
concerns for officer safety.
In the bathroom at the station, Officer Walker asked the defendant to remove his
clothes but not his underwear. Officer Walker searched the defendant's clothes but not
his person. Officer Walker found nothing and noted no bulges to indicate anything was
taped under the defendant's scrotum, which Officer Walker had heard from a confidential informant was the defendant's practice with regard to hiding drugs. The
defendant put his clothes on.
Officer Walker then told the defendant the officer intended to search the
defendant's apartment and asked if the defendant wanted a ride to the apartment. The
defendant agreed to accompany the officer and, again, rode unrestrained in the back
seat of the cruiser. Trooper Record followed Officer Walker to the apartment.
Upon arrival, the defendant opened the door to the apartment and the officers
and the defendant entered the apartment. Andrea Dyer was present with her baby.
Officer Walker did not know Ms. Dyer.
While Trooper Record remained in the kitchen-living room area, Officer Walker
searched the defendant's bedroom. He lifted the mattress and looked around at items
in plain view. He did not search the bureau, closets, or clothing. Officer Walker told
the defendant he was "all set" and left the apartment with Trooper Record.
Officer Walker had previously received information from a confidential
informant that the defendant was hiding cocaine above the doorframe in the common
area of the apartment building outside the defendant's apartment. Trooper Record
lifted Officer Walker up toward the top of the doorframe of the door that led to the
laundry area. Officer Walker saw white powder in plastic bags. Officer Walker seized
the bags. The powder was subsequently tested and identified as cocaine.
The defendant then entered the hallway and walked in and out of the apartment
two or three times. Officer Walker informed the defendant the officers had found the
cocaine. The defendant replied that the cocaine was not his. The defendant was not
taken into custody at that time.
At the request of Officer Walker, Winslow Police Officer Haley Flemming
arrived next at the apartment building. Officer Flemming and Trooper Record entered
2 the defendant's aparbnent. Both spoke to Ms. Dyer. She told the officers that after
Officer Walker and Trooper Record left the aparbnent the first time, the defendant
entered, removed a plastic bag from his groin area, and directed her to put the pills in
the hood of a sweat shirt. Ms. Dyer showed the officers where the pills were located.
Trooper Record advised Ms. Dyer that she was placing herself and her child in a
bad situation. He told her that law enforcement knew the defendant was moving drugs
from the aparbnent, and because she lived there, she must know what was happening.
She agreed that she did. Trooper Record stated that she could be considered part of the
criminal enterprise and could be charged with criminal offenses. He stated that he
could call the Deparbnent of Health and Human Services. Trooper Record told Ms.
Dyer it was in her best interests to "come clean" and not lie to the officers but he did not
threaten any consequences if she did not cooperate.
Officer Walker remained outside while Trooper Record and Officer Flemming
were in the aparbnent. The defendant was with Officer Walker part of the time and
was able to come and go, as he wanted. When Trooper Record left the aparbnent and
reported that 152 Oxycodone pills had been found in the aparbnent in small plastic
bags, Officer Walker advised the defendant that he was under arrest, handcuffed him,
and placed him in the back seat of the cruiser. No Miranda warnings were given to the
defendant at that time.
Kennebec County Sheriff's Deparbnent Deputy George Neagle arrived next.
Officer Walker asked if the defendant would submit to a canine search of the
defendant's person. He agreed. Deputy Neagle was aware the defendant was in
custody and did not advise him of the Miranda warnings. Deputy Neagle told the
defendant about the narcotic-detection dog and that this was an opportunity for the
defendant to help himself by cooperating. Deputy Neagle asked the defendant if he
3 had any drugs and the defendant replied that he did not. He stated that he smoked
marijuana earlier that morning. The search was conducted by Deputy Neagle with
Officer Walker present. During the search, the dog gave a positive indication at the
defendant's crotch area. Deputy Neagle asked again whether the defendant had any
drugs on him. The defendant said he did not but changed his earlier statement about
having smoked marijuana earlier to having marijuana in his pants. He said he gave the
marijuana to someone because he did not want to get caught. No illegal drugs were
located during the search. The defendant was placed in the cruiser again.
Officer Flemming took the defendant to the police station. Officer Walker
conducted the booking process and read the Miranda warnings to the defendant at
approximately 11:59 p.m. Officer Walker read each question and obtained an answer to
each question. The defendant understood his rights, did not want to speak to the
officer, and signed the form. (State's Ex. 2.) Thereafter, Officer Walker did not ask any
questions except routine booking questions.
Officer Walker called the bail commissioner, who set the defendant's bail during
the telephone call. Officer Walker told the bail commissioner in the defendant's
presence the charges that would be brought against him. Officer Walker completed the
uniform summons and complaint and gave it to the defendant.
Officers Walker and Flemming walked with the defendant to the parking lot of
the police station. He asked if he could smoke a cigarette. Officer Walker handcuffed
the defendant's hands in front of his body as opposed to the rear so he could smoke.
The defendant appeared nervous and scared and was almost crying. The defendant
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, ss CRINIINAL ACTION DOCKET NO. CR-08r955 /:!/7/) " " /,1 ~/
STATE OF MAINE c ,_.~"" '~, .~ \ / . . , ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S \
v. MOTION TO SUPPRESS
EMMANUEL REYNOLDS
Defendant
The defendant seeks to suppress evidence obtained as a result of a bail search.
For the following reasons, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
FINDINGS
On 12/16/08, Winslow Police Officer Nathan Walker was on patrol on
Monument Street in Winslow when he noticed the defendant driving a motor vehicle
with a female passenger. Officer Walker was familiar with the defendant and knew he
was on bail for assault with conditions of random search and testing of the defendant's
person, vehicle, and residence for illegal drugs and alcohol. (State's Ex. 1.) Officer
Walker stopped the defendant's vehicle for a bail check just after 9:00 p.m. The
defendant agreed to go to the police station for a search. The defendant rode with the
officer in the back seat of the cruiser. The defendant was not restrained or handcuffed.
Maine State Police Trooper Derrick Record also responded to the scene, stood by during
the traffic stop, and followed Officer Walker to the police station. He assisted based on
concerns for officer safety.
In the bathroom at the station, Officer Walker asked the defendant to remove his
clothes but not his underwear. Officer Walker searched the defendant's clothes but not
his person. Officer Walker found nothing and noted no bulges to indicate anything was
taped under the defendant's scrotum, which Officer Walker had heard from a confidential informant was the defendant's practice with regard to hiding drugs. The
defendant put his clothes on.
Officer Walker then told the defendant the officer intended to search the
defendant's apartment and asked if the defendant wanted a ride to the apartment. The
defendant agreed to accompany the officer and, again, rode unrestrained in the back
seat of the cruiser. Trooper Record followed Officer Walker to the apartment.
Upon arrival, the defendant opened the door to the apartment and the officers
and the defendant entered the apartment. Andrea Dyer was present with her baby.
Officer Walker did not know Ms. Dyer.
While Trooper Record remained in the kitchen-living room area, Officer Walker
searched the defendant's bedroom. He lifted the mattress and looked around at items
in plain view. He did not search the bureau, closets, or clothing. Officer Walker told
the defendant he was "all set" and left the apartment with Trooper Record.
Officer Walker had previously received information from a confidential
informant that the defendant was hiding cocaine above the doorframe in the common
area of the apartment building outside the defendant's apartment. Trooper Record
lifted Officer Walker up toward the top of the doorframe of the door that led to the
laundry area. Officer Walker saw white powder in plastic bags. Officer Walker seized
the bags. The powder was subsequently tested and identified as cocaine.
The defendant then entered the hallway and walked in and out of the apartment
two or three times. Officer Walker informed the defendant the officers had found the
cocaine. The defendant replied that the cocaine was not his. The defendant was not
taken into custody at that time.
At the request of Officer Walker, Winslow Police Officer Haley Flemming
arrived next at the apartment building. Officer Flemming and Trooper Record entered
2 the defendant's aparbnent. Both spoke to Ms. Dyer. She told the officers that after
Officer Walker and Trooper Record left the aparbnent the first time, the defendant
entered, removed a plastic bag from his groin area, and directed her to put the pills in
the hood of a sweat shirt. Ms. Dyer showed the officers where the pills were located.
Trooper Record advised Ms. Dyer that she was placing herself and her child in a
bad situation. He told her that law enforcement knew the defendant was moving drugs
from the aparbnent, and because she lived there, she must know what was happening.
She agreed that she did. Trooper Record stated that she could be considered part of the
criminal enterprise and could be charged with criminal offenses. He stated that he
could call the Deparbnent of Health and Human Services. Trooper Record told Ms.
Dyer it was in her best interests to "come clean" and not lie to the officers but he did not
threaten any consequences if she did not cooperate.
Officer Walker remained outside while Trooper Record and Officer Flemming
were in the aparbnent. The defendant was with Officer Walker part of the time and
was able to come and go, as he wanted. When Trooper Record left the aparbnent and
reported that 152 Oxycodone pills had been found in the aparbnent in small plastic
bags, Officer Walker advised the defendant that he was under arrest, handcuffed him,
and placed him in the back seat of the cruiser. No Miranda warnings were given to the
defendant at that time.
Kennebec County Sheriff's Deparbnent Deputy George Neagle arrived next.
Officer Walker asked if the defendant would submit to a canine search of the
defendant's person. He agreed. Deputy Neagle was aware the defendant was in
custody and did not advise him of the Miranda warnings. Deputy Neagle told the
defendant about the narcotic-detection dog and that this was an opportunity for the
defendant to help himself by cooperating. Deputy Neagle asked the defendant if he
3 had any drugs and the defendant replied that he did not. He stated that he smoked
marijuana earlier that morning. The search was conducted by Deputy Neagle with
Officer Walker present. During the search, the dog gave a positive indication at the
defendant's crotch area. Deputy Neagle asked again whether the defendant had any
drugs on him. The defendant said he did not but changed his earlier statement about
having smoked marijuana earlier to having marijuana in his pants. He said he gave the
marijuana to someone because he did not want to get caught. No illegal drugs were
located during the search. The defendant was placed in the cruiser again.
Officer Flemming took the defendant to the police station. Officer Walker
conducted the booking process and read the Miranda warnings to the defendant at
approximately 11:59 p.m. Officer Walker read each question and obtained an answer to
each question. The defendant understood his rights, did not want to speak to the
officer, and signed the form. (State's Ex. 2.) Thereafter, Officer Walker did not ask any
questions except routine booking questions.
Officer Walker called the bail commissioner, who set the defendant's bail during
the telephone call. Officer Walker told the bail commissioner in the defendant's
presence the charges that would be brought against him. Officer Walker completed the
uniform summons and complaint and gave it to the defendant.
Officers Walker and Flemming walked with the defendant to the parking lot of
the police station. He asked if he could smoke a cigarette. Officer Walker handcuffed
the defendant's hands in front of his body as opposed to the rear so he could smoke.
The defendant appeared nervous and scared and was almost crying. The defendant
stated he would have to "man up" to the pills and admitted the pills were his but denied
that the cocaine was his. Neither officer asked questions before or after those
statements were made.
4 Officer Flemming then transported the defendant to the Kennebec County
Correctional Facility in Officer Walker's cruiser. Officer Flemming asked no questions
en route.
CONCLUSIONS
The defendant's bail conditions provide for random search and testing of his
person, vehicle, and residence. The search of the defendant's person at the police
station was reasonable, especially considering the information conveyed to law
enforcement from a confidential informant.
The defendant did not object to the search of the apartment and agreed to
accompany the officers to the apartment. State v. Kremen, 2000 NIB 117, <]I 7, 754 A.2d
964, 967 (a search conducted pursuant to valid consent is an exception to the
requirements of a warrant and probable cause). Officer Walker's search of the bedroom
did not exceed a search authorized by the bail bond. See State v. UUring, 1999 ME 183,
<]I<]I 12, 19,27, 741 A.2d 1065, 1068, 1070-71, 1073. The search of the common area, where
the defendant had no expectation of privacy, also did not exceed a search authorized by
the bail bond. See State v. Griatzky, 587 A.2d 234, 236 (Me. 1991) (defendant had no
reasonable expectation of privacy in common areas of her apartment building).
Ms. Dyer, a resident of the apartment, led Trooper Record and Officer Flemming
to the Oxycodone pills in the bedroom. See Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.s. 103, 110-11
(2006) (consent is sufficient when given by a person who reasonably appears to have
common authority); State v. Thibodeau, 317 A.2d 172, 177-78 (Me. 1974) (same). The
officers' conduct did not exceed a search authorized by the bail bond. See UUring, 1999
ME 183, <]I<]I 12, 19, 27, 741 A.2d at 1068, 1070-71, 1073.
After the defendant was arrested, he agreed to a search by the drug dog.
Kremen, 2000 ME 117, <]I 7, 754 A.2d at 967. The search was also incident to his arrest.
5 See State v. Foy, 662 A.2d 238, 241 (Me. 1995) ("A search conducted incident to a lawful
arrest is a recognized exception to the general rule that a warrant be obtained in order
to conduct a search.").
Statements
The defendant was not in custody until he was placed under arrest by Officer
Walker. State v. Bridges, 2003 ME 103,
whether reasonable person in defendant's shoes would feel he was not at liberty to end
interrogation and leave). After the arrest, Officers Walker and Flemming and Trooper
Record asked no questions and made no statements that they should have known were
"reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect." State v. Nixon,
599 A.2d 66, 67 (Me. 1991) (quoting Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 301 (1980)).
After the arrest and before the Miranda warnings were read to the defendant,
Deputy Neagle asked questions of the defendant. The defendant answered the
questions voluntarily. State v. Sawyer, 2001 ME 88,
circumstances analysis to determine voluntariness). The defendant's statements in
response to Deputy Neagle's questions are suppressed in the State's case-in-chief. See
State v. Durepo, 472 A.2d 919, 922 (Me. 1984) (Miranda mandates that "the prosecution
be barred from the use of illegally obtained statements in its case-in-chief").
Derivative Standing
The defendant objects to the admissibility of any statements made allegedly in
violation of Ms. Dyer's constitutional rights. However, Ms. Dyer's Miranda rights are
personal to her, and the defendant has no standing to assert this alleged violation.
United States v. Escobar, 50 F.3d 1414, 1422 (8th Cir. 1995). Moreover, Ms. Dyer was not
in custody during her interaction with law enforcement on 12/16/08. See State v.
Higgins, 2002 ME 77,
6 defendant is: (1) in custody; and (2) subject to interrogation."). Her statements were
voluntary. Sawyer, 2001 ME 88,
improperly during their interaction with her. See State v. Hewes, 558 A.2d 696, 700
(Me. 1989) (directing courts to address, in examining whether statements are voluntary,
whether "coercive or improper tactics" were used).l
The entry is
The Defendant's Motion to Suppress is GRANTED as follows: the Defendant's statements to Deputy Neagle are SUPPRESSED in the State's case-in-chief.
The remainder of the Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.
Date: May 13, 2009 ancy Mills Justice, Superior Court
1 The defendant has offered no case law to support his "derivative status" argument. To the
extent he somehow argues that the police conduct violated due process, the facts of this case do not in any way "shock the conscience" or offend a "sense of justice." See Breithaupt v. Abram, 352 U.S. 432, 435-36 (1957) (cognizable substantive due process claim is based on conduct that does not comport with traditional ideas of fair play and decency.).
7 STATE OF t-1AINE SUPERIOR COURT vs KENNEBEC, ss. EMMANUEL REYNOLDS Docket No AUGSC-CR-2008-00955 28 HALIFAX ST. #4 WINSLOW ME 04901 DOCKET RECORD
DOB: OS/26/1980 Attorney: CHARLES FERRIS State's Attorney: EVERT FOWLE FERRIS, CHANDLER & CROOK ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW 11 PARK STREET WATERVILLE ME 04901 APPOINTED 01/13/2009
Filing Document: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Major Case Type: FELONY (CLASS A,B,C) Filing Date: 12/17/2008
Charge(s)
1 AGGRAVATED TRAFFICKING OF SCHEDULED DRUGS 12/16/2008 WINSLOW Seq 8555 17-A 1105-A(1) (B) (1) Class A
2 UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF OXYCODONE 12/16/2008 WINSLOW Seq 11123 17-A 1107-A(1) (B) (4) Class C
3 VIOLATING CONDITION OF RELEASE 12/16/2008 WINSLOW Seq 9632 15 1092 (1) (A) Class E
Docket Events:
12/17/2008 FILING DOCUMENT - CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 12/17/2008
12/17/2008 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - INITIAL APPEARANCE SCHEDULED FOR 12/17/2008 @ 1:00
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/17/2008 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - INITIAL APPEARANCE HELD ON 12/17/2008 DONALD H MARDEN , JUSTICE Defendant Present in Court
IN CUSTODY - ER TAPE 1058 12/1.7/2008 Charge(s): 1,2,3 PLEA - NO ANSWER ENTERED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/17/2008
12/17/2008 BAIL BOND - $10,000.00 CASH BAIL BOND SET BY COURT ON 12/17/2008 DONALD H MARDEN , JUSTICE OR $50,000.00 SURETY 12/17/2008 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 02/24/2009 @ 10:00
12/17/2008 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 12/17/2008
Page 1 of 4 Printed on: 05/14/2009 EMMANUEL REYNOLDS AUGSC-CR-2008-00955 DOCKET RECORD 12/18/2008 MOTION - MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT FILED BY STATE ON 12/18/2008
12/23/2008 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL GRANTED ON 12/18/2008 DONALD H MARDEN , JUSTICE COpy TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 12/23/2008 Party (s): EMMANUEL REYNOLDS ATTORNEY - APPOINTED ORDERED ON 12/18/2008
Attorney: JOHN O'DONNELL 12/23/2008 Charge (s) : 1,2,3 HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE NOTICE SENT ON 01/14/2009
01/09/2009 BAIL BOND - CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 01/09/2009
01/09/2009 BAIL BOND - $10,000.00 CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 01/09/2009
Bail Receipt Type: CR Bail Amt: $10,000 Receipt Type: CK Date Bailed: 01/09/2009 Prvdr Name: TARA PELLETIER Rtrn Name: TARA PELLETIER
01/12/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF CNSL FILED BY COUNSEL ON 01/12/2009
01/14/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF CNSL GRANTED ON 01/13/2009 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE 1/14/09: COpy TO COUNSEL & DA THIS DATE 01/14/2009 Party(s): EMMANUEL REYNOLDS ATTORNEY - WITHDRAWN ORDERED ON 01/13/2009
Attorney: JOHN O'DONNELL 01/14/2009 Party (s) : EMMANUEL REYNOLDS ATTORNEY - APPOINTED ORDERED ON 01/13/2009
Attorney: CHARLES FERRIS 02/05/2009 Charge(s) : 1,2,3 HEARING - STATUS CONFERENCE NOT HELD ON 02/04/2009
02/05/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 SUPPLEMENTAL FILING - INDICTMENT FILED ON 02/05/2009
02/05/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 02/17/2009 @ 8:30 JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE 02/05/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT NOTICE SENT ON 02/05/2009
02/17/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT HELD ON 02/17/2009 JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE READING WAIVED. DEFENDANT INFORMED OF CHARGES. COpy OF INDICTMENT/INFORMATION GIVEN TO DEFENDANT. 21 DAYS TO FILE MOTIONS 02/17/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 Page 2 of 4 Printed on: 05/14/2009 EMMANUEL REYNOLDS AUGSC-CR-200S-00955 DOCKET RECORD PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY DEFENDANT ON 02/17/2009
02/17/2009 BAIL BOND - CASH BAIL BOND COND RELEASE ISSUED ON 02/17/2009 JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE $10,000.00 AS POSTED ... AMENDED BAIL CONDITIONS. 02/27/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR FUNDS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 02/27/2009
02/27/2009 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 02/27/2009
03/04/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR FUNDS GRANTED ON 03/04/2009 JOHN NIVISON, JUSTICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 03/04/2009 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS SCHEDULED FOR 04/0S/2009 @ 10:00
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 04/03/2009 MOTION - MOTION TO REVOKE BAIL FILED BY STATE ON 04/03/2009
04/06/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/03/2009
04/06/2009 Charge(s): 1,2,3 HEARING - INITIAL APPEARANCE HELD ON 04/03/2009 JOSEPH M JABAR , JUSTICE Defendant Present in Court
INITIAL APPEARANCE ON MOTION TO REVOKE BAIL 04/06/2009 BAIL BOND - $10,000.00 CASH BAIL BOND CONTINUED AS POSTED ON 04/03/2009 JOSEPH M JABAR , JUSTICE 04/21/2009 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS HELD ON 04/0S/2009 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE Attorney: CHARLES FERRIS Reporter: TAMMY DROUIN Defendant Present in Court 04/:21/2009 OTHER FILING - OTHER DOCUMENT FILED ON 04/16/2009
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO THE STATE'S MOTION FOR REVOCATION OF PRE-CONVICTION BAIL 04/21/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/16/2009
Attorney: CHARLES FERRIS 04/21/2009 MOTION - OTHER MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/16/2009
Attorney: CHARLES FERRIS MOTION FOR IDENTIFICATION OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT WITH INCORPORATED MEMO 04/21/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 04/16/2009
MOTION FOR SPECIFIC DISCOVERY 05/14/2009 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS UNDER ADVISEMENT ON 04/0S/2009 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE 05/14/2009 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS GRANTED ON 05/14/2009 NANCY MILLS, JUSTICE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS IS GRANTED AS FOLLOWS: THE DEFENDANT'S STATEMENTS TO DEPUTY NEAGLE ARE SUPPRESSED IN THE STATE'S CASE IN CHIEF, THE REMAINDER OF THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS IS DENIED Page 3 of 4 Printed on: 05/14/2009 EMMANUEL REYNOLDS AUGSC-CR-2008-00955 DOCKET RECORD 05/14/2009 HEARING - MOTION TO REVOKE BAIL SCHEDULED FOR 07/08/2009 @ 8:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 05/14/2009 HEARING - MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SCHEDULED FOR 07/08/2009 @ 8:30
NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 05/14/2009 HEARING - OTHER MOTION SCHEDULED FOR 07/08/2009 @ 8:30
MOTION FOR IDENTIFICATION OF CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT 05/14/2009 MOTION - MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF CNSL GRANTED ON 04/06/2009 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE COpy TO PARTIES/COUNSEL
A TRUE COPY ATTEST: Clerk
Page 4 of 4 Printed on: 05/14/2009