United States v. Jeffrey Visger
This text of 988 F.2d 126 (United States v. Jeffrey Visger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
988 F.2d 126
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jeffrey VISGER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 89-50353.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted March 1, 1993.*
Decided March 3, 1993.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. CR-88-0557-KN, David V. Kenyon, District Judge, Presiding.
C.D.Cal.
AFFIRMED.
Before JAMES R. BROWNING, HUG and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM**
Visger and the postal inspectors who interviewed him gave differing versions of what was said at the interview. In denying the motion to suppress Visger's statements, the district judge necessarily credited the testimony of the postal inspectors over that of Visger. See United States v. Coletta, 682 F.2d 820, 825 (9th Cir.1982). Based on the inspectors' version of the interview, denial of the motion to suppress was proper.
AFFIRMED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
988 F.2d 126, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 10712, 1993 WL 57261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jeffrey-visger-ca9-1993.