857 F.3d 128 (1st Cir. 2017), 15-1692, United States v. Hillaire
|Citation:||857 F.3d 128|
|Opinion Judge:||BARRON, Circuit Judge.|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. JERVIS A. HILLAIRE, Defendant, Appellant|
|Attorney:||James S. Hewes for appellant. Renée M. Bunker, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Thomas E. Delahanty II, United States Attorney, was on brief, for appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||Before Lynch, Thompson, and Barron, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||May 18, 2017|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit|
The First Circuit affirmed Defendant’s conviction for conspiracy to commit access-device fraud. Before trial, Defendant and his co-defendant filed motions to suppress evidence and statements that had been obtained in the previous months in connection with three traffic stops. The district court denied the motions to suppress. The First Circuit affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not err ... (see full summary)
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE. Hon. D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Judge.
James S. Hewes for appellant.
Renée M. Bunker, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Thomas E. Delahanty II, United States Attorney, was on brief, for appellee.
Before Lynch, Thompson, and Barron, Circuit Judges.
BARRON, Circuit Judge.
Jervis A. Hillaire challenges his conviction for conspiracy to commit access-device fraud on the ground that the District Court erred in denying his pretrial suppression motion. We affirm.
Hillaire, along with his co-defendant, Gyadeen P. Ramdihall, was indicted in federal court in the District of Maine on February 25, 2014, for conspiracy to possess and use counterfeit access devices with intent to defraud, see 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(1), (a)(3), (b)(2); id. § 371, as well as several related counts. Specifically, Hillaire was also indicted for (1) possession of
counterfeit access devices, and aiding and abetting such possession; (2) use of counterfeit access devices, and aiding and abetting such use; and (3) wire fraud, and aiding and abetting wire fraud. See 18 U.S.C. § 1029(a)(1), (a)(3); id. § 1343; id. § 2. Before their trial, Hillaire and Ramdihall submitted motions to the District Court to suppress evidence and statements that had been obtained in the previous months in connection with three traffic stops.
Two of the stops occurred in Maine, on September 6, 2013 and January 24, 2014, respectively, and were carried out by local law enforcement. The other stop occurred in Ohio, on October 10, 2013, and was carried out by state law enforcement. The evidence Hillaire and Ramdihall sought to suppress included seventeen credit cards that were found in the trunk of a rental car during the Ohio traffic stop on October 10, 2013, as well as the information that law enforcement obtained from those cards by swiping the cards' magnetic strips through...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP