United States v. Jonathon Marc Sutter

Good Law
340 F.3d 1022
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 4, 200302-50282California5,098 words

Opinion

Opinion

Berzon, J.

The tick-tock of the Speedy Trial Act clock is difficult to measure when the parties allow a pre-trial discovery motion to pend indefinitely in the absence of any live discovery dispute. We conclude that where a discovery motion is pending on the docket, but the district court is neither awaiting additional submissions nor has indicated that the motion requires a future hearing, the discovery motion is “under advisement” under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(l)(J), and a maximum of thirty days can be excluded under that provision.

On the unique facts of this case, however, there was no Speedy Trial Act violation. We also reject Sutter’s challenge of the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence retrieved during a border search.

I. BACKGROUND

Jonathon Marc Sutter appeals from a conditional guilty plea, challenging the district court’s denial of his suppression motion, as well as from the denial of his motion to dismiss under the Speedy Trial Act.

A. The Border Search

The events leading to Sutter’s arrest took place at the United States port of entry at Calexico, CA. A primary inspection agent, Agent Jackson, asked Sutter several questions regarding his citizenship and…

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.