United States v. Richard Mittelman Weldon Ray Reeves

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 9325·999 F.2d 440·1993 WL 267479·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 18319·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5517
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 21, 199392-10623California2,526 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The government appeals from the district court’s order suppressing all evidence seized during a warranted search of Reeves’s law office. The government argues that the district court clearly erred in finding .both that Federal Bureau of Investigation Agent Per-eira (Agent) made false statements to' the federal magistrate who issued the warrant and that the resulting search exceeded the scope of the warrant. The government also argues that the court erred in suppressing all evidence seized during the search, including evidence within the scope of the warrant. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 , and we have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3731 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We vacate the district court’s order and remand.

I

In November-1990, the Agent participated in a search of a residence belonging to Mit-telman, who was suspected of bank and bankruptcy fraud. Reeves was Mittelman’s attorney. Based on the evidence found, at Mittelman’s, the Agent sought a warrant from a federal magistrate to search Reeves’s law office. The Agent informed the magistrate that probable cause existed to believe that the office contained evidence of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.