United States Sixth Circuit

In a prosecution for manufacturing and passing counterfeit currency, district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress key evidence used against him is reversed and remanded where: 1) the inevitable discovery doctrine does not apply to warrantless searches where a warrant could have been obtained based on probable cause; and 2) the case is remanded to evaluate the statements made by defendant to the agents, based on the mistaken belief that the printer was properly admissible evidence, to evaluate whether they should also be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/01/2009
• Published 10/01/2009

Judges

• Before:  GILMAN, COOK, and FARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Jeffrey Paul Nunnari, Law Office, Toledo, Ohio, for Appellant.  David O. Bauer, Assistant United States Attorney, Toledo, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Jeffrey Paul Nunnari, Law Office, Toledo, Ohio, for Appellant.  David O. Bauer, Assistant United States Attorney, Toledo, Ohio, for Appellee.