United States v. Darrell Allen Ridgway

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 9794·300 F.3d 1153·2002 WL 1963273·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7798·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 17650
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 26, 200201-30337California2,151 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Darrell Ridgway appeals from the order of the district court denying his motion to suppress evidence seized by United States Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) officers while executing a search warrant at his house. The district court referred the motion to suppress to a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge found the testimony of the Government’s key witness to be incredible and recommended that the defendant’s motion to suppress be granted. The district court rejected the magistrate judge’s credibility determination and denied the motion without conducting a de novo evidentiary hearing. We vacate the order denying Ridgway’s motion to suppress and remand for a de novo evidentia-ry hearing because we conclude that a district court must conduct its own eviden-tiary hearing before rejecting a magistrate judge’s credibility findings made after a hearing on a motion to suppress.

I

On January 25, 2001, DEA Special Agent Cary Freeman executed a search warrant to search Ridgway’s house for evidence of marijuana production. The police seized 135 marijuana plants and other evidence of marijuana production before arresting Ridgway. The face of the search warrant that Special Agent Freeman…

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.