United States v. Richard Harry Reeh, Arlington Douglas Sprecher, Theodore Duane Jorden and Michael Ryan
This text of 725 F.2d 633 (United States v. Richard Harry Reeh, Arlington Douglas Sprecher, Theodore Duane Jorden and Michael Ryan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In this marijuana case the district court denied a motion to suppress as evidence the seized marijuana. In the subsequent bench trial defendants were found guilty. After a notice of appeal was filed, defendants filed what the district court deemed a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. The district judge certified to this court that he was disposed to grant the motion should this court remand the case in accordance with the procedure approved in U.S. v. Fuentes-Lozano, 580 F.2d 724, 725-26 (5th Cir.1978) (per curiam).
The case is REMANDED to the district court for its ruling on the motion for new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
725 F.2d 633, 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 25180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-richard-harry-reeh-arlington-douglas-sprecher-theodore-ca11-1984.