Wednesday, September 07, 2016

US v. Carey, No. 14-50222 (9-7-16)(Gould w/Fletcher; dissent by Kozinski). We know about "plain view," what about "plain speaking"? That is the issue here, where the majority vacates the denial of a suppression motion and remands to determine when the agents, on a wiretap, realized the conversation was about a different conspiracy.  Oh yes, the conversations stretched over 7 days, involving indicted and unindicated co-conspirators.  Dissenting, Kozinski agrees with "plain hearing," but does not think the remand should be on an "open record." The agents had declared that they believed the conspiracies were related and only realized they weren't after a traffic stop.  The defendant could have contested this declaration at the hearing but did not.

The decision is here:


Post a Comment

<< Home