United States Seventh Circuit

Reset A A Font size: Print

US v. Ginglen, 06-1074

Denial of a motion to suppress evidence of bank robberies seized from the defendant's home is affirmed, along with his numerous bank robbery and weapons convictions, where the defendant's sons were not acting as government agents since: 1) they acted to protect their father and others from further harm, not to assist law enforcement; 2) the government did not encourage or acquiesce in the sons' decision to enter their parents' home; and 3) a son who worked for a nearby police department did not collect evidence in the home. In addition, the police seized the evidence pursuant to a search warrant that contained untainted information sufficient to establish probable cause, and the search warrant was valid under the independent source doctrine.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 11/06/2006
  • Published 11/06/2006

Judges

  • FLAUM, Chief Judge., Before FLAUM, Chief Judge, and RIPPLE and EVANS, Circuit Judges.

Court

  • United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

  • For Appellees:
  • Patrick J. Chesley (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Springfield, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Ronald Hamm, Hamm & Hanna, Jeffrey L. Flanagan (argued), Peoria, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Copied to clipboard