1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 676 F.Supp.
  5. 676 F.Supp. 445 (1987)
 

U.S. v. SANCHEZ

Crim. No. B-87-35 (TFGD).

676 F.Supp. 445 (1987)

UNITED STATES of America v. Mariano SANCHEZ, a/k/a "The Boss", Miguel Rodriguez, a/k/a "Michael Rodriguez", Elsa Sanchez, a/k/a "Cuca", Luis Robles, a/k/a "Papo", Jose Rivera, a/k/a "Fury", Edward Giusti, a/k/a "Colorao", a/k/a "Big Red", William Giusti, a/k/a "Colorao Chiquito", a/k/a "Little Red", Hector Torres, Maurice Fane, a/k/a "Moe", Raymond Aponte, a/k/a "Ray", Benjamin Grant, a/k/a "Ben", Carmen Fred, a/k/a "Milagros" and Carlos Laureano.

United States District Court, D. Connecticut.

December 1, 1987.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Linda Lager, Denis King, Asst. U.S. Attys., and Stanley Twardy, Jr., U.S. Atty., Bridgeport, Conn., for U.S.

Richard T. Meehan, Jr. and James J. Ruane, Meehan and Meehan, Bridgeport, Conn., for Mariano Sanchez.

Ralph L. Palmesi, Palmesi, Kaufman, Portanova & Goldstein, P.C., Trumbull, Conn., for Miguel Rodriguez.

Thomas E. Minogue, Jr., Kleban and Samor, Southport, Conn., for Elsa Sanchez.

John R. Gulash, Jr., Bridgeport, Conn., for Luis Robles.

Alan Bleiman, Fairfield, Conn., for Jose Rivera.

William M. Bloss, Jacobs, Grudberg, Belt and Dow, P.C., New Haven, Conn., for Edward Giusti.

Howard C. Eckenrode, Milford, Conn., for William Giusti.

Frank J. Riccio, Bridgeport, Conn., for Hector Torres.

Stanley P. Atwood and Daniel B. Glass, Sherwood, Garlick, Cowell, Diviney & Atwood, Westport, Conn., for Maurice Fane.

Sarah A. Chambers, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, New Haven, Conn., for Benjamin Grant.

Howard T. Owens, Jr., Stephen F. Donahue and Elaine M. Scanlon, Owens & Schine, Bridgeport, Conn., for Raymond Aponte.

Richard Emanuel, Bridgeport, Conn., for Carmen Fred.

Warren A. Luedecker, Trumbull, Conn., for Carlos Laureano.

PRELIMINARY RULING ON PENDING MOTION TO SUPPRESS

DALY, Chief Judge.

The defendants in the above-captioned matter have filed joint motions to suppress both tangible evidence and intercepted wire communications. The government has responded to those motions, and hearings on certain aspects of them presently are scheduled to commence on December 2, 1987. The defendants have sought, prior to the hearing, a ruling from the Court on the issues they raise in section...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases