United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER ON PENDING MOTIONS
Cohn AVERN COHN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
a criminal case. Defendants are: (1) Demarco Tempo; (2)
Haratio Heard; (3) Juwan Allen; (4) Darius Gordon; (5), Alvin
Coates; (6) Javon Brown; (7) Greg Howard; (8) Dennis Jones;
(9) Amacio Alexander; (10) Marcus Gilbert; (11) Kenneth
Sadler; (12) Darreyl Coneal; and (13) Randy Stewart.
indictment is in 27 counts. All of the defendants are charged
with conspiracy to distribute heroin. Other charges facing
some defendants are: (1) death or serious bodily injury
resulting from use of a controlled substance (enhanced
penalty); (2) conspiracy to possess firearms in furtherance
of drug trafficking; (3) distribution of a controlled
substance resulting in serious bodily injury; (4)
distribution of a controlled substances resulting in death;
(5) distribution of a controlled substance; (6) possession of
a controlled substance with intent to distribute near a
school; (7) possession of a controlled substance with intent
to distribute; and (8) possession of firearm and ammunition
by a convicted felon. Some of the defendants have plead and
are awaiting sentencing.
26, 2017, the Court held a hearing on pending motions. This
order memorializes the rulings at the hearing.
Demarco Tempo's Motion to Declare 18 U.S.C. §
841(b)(1)(C) Unconstitutional or Declare That a Violation
Requires a Showing of Proximate Cause (Doc. 220)
reasons stated on the record, the motion is DENIED. Briefly,
as Tempo concedes, no court addressing this issue has held
the statute unconstitutional nor found that a violation
requires a showing of proximate cause. Although the Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has not ruled on the issue, the
Court finds the decisions of other Circuits persuasive, as
fully explicated in the government's response. In
particular, the Court agrees with the holdings in United
States v. Hatfield, 591 f.3d 945 (7th Cir.
2010), United States v. Soler, 275 F.3d 146
(1st Cir. 2002), and United States v.
Patterson, 38 F.3d 139 (4th Cir. 1994).
Demarco Tempo's Motion for a Bill of Particulars (Doc.
says the indictment is insufficient as to Counts 3, 4, 5, and
7. The government says that the motion is an inappropriate
attempt at discovery and there is no need for a bill of
motion is DENIED. However, the government shall inform Tempo
of the evidence intended to be offered to support each count
against him as described at the hearing.
Demarco Tempo's Motion to Suppress Search Warrant (Doc.
251) Tempo moves to suppress evidence obtained from a search
warrant for a GPS tracking device on a vehicle. The
government says the vehicle tracking warrant was lawfully
obtained, that Tempo has no reasonable expectation of privacy
in the vehicle (a rental car for which he was not the
licensed driver), and that Tempo fails to properly identify
the evidence it seeks to suppress.
motion is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT. In light of the discussion
at the hearing, if Tempo wishes to pursue the motion, he
shall file a supplemental paper within twenty (20) days which
identifies the evidence sought to be suppressed. Such
evidence presumably consists of the tracking data, i.e. the
routes the vehicle took, and observations of agents tracking
the vehicle. Tempo is reminded of the government's
statement that it would likely not use tracking data at
Darius Gordon's Motion to Suppress Identification
Testimony (Doc. 212) This motion concerns a May 10, 2016
photo identification of Gordon and Coasts by “Victim
3.” The government says ...