United States v. Marvin Schultz

Good Law
464 F. App'x 567
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 27, 201110-10505, 11-10086California455 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Marvin Schultz and Jason Wallace appeal from the district court’s order denying their joint motion to suppress and subsequent conviction and sentencing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.

A district court cannot reject a magistrate judge’s credibility determinations made in a magistrate judge’s recommendation on a motion to suppress without conducting a de novo, live evidentiary hearing. United States v. Bergera, 512 F.2d 391, 392 (9th Cir.1975). There is “no procedural burden on the defendant to request that the district court take live testimony” in this circumstance. United States v. Ridgway, 300 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir.2002). The district court’s ruling, in rejecting the magistrate judge’s report “in its entirety,” rejects all credibility determinations made by the magistrate judge. From a review of the record, it seems that the magistrate judge made at least two credibility determinations. He at least determined that Agent Winnecke’s testimony about Saban’s Car Rental policy (conflicting with other police officers’ testimony) was not truthful. He also questioned Agent Winnecke’s testimony about whether the length of time the defendants’…

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.