Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. RICHARD HARRY REEH, ARLINGTON DOUGLAS SPRECHER, THEODORE DUANE JORDEN AND MICHAEL RYAN, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

PER CURIAM:

In this marijuana case the district court denied a motion to suppress as evidence the seized marijuana. In the subsequent bench trial defendants were found guilty. After a notice of appeal was filed, defendants filed what the district court deemed a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. The district judge certified to this court that he was disposed to grant the motion should this court remand the case in accordance with the procedure approved in U.S. v. Fuentes-Lozano, 580 F.2d 724, 725-26 (5th Cir. 1978) (per curiam).

The case is REMANDED to the district court for its ruling on the motion for new trial.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNITED STATES v. REEH
(Feb 24, 1984)