Summary
holding that “pursuant to Dionisio, because Teter regularly exposes to the public his face, as well as his finger and palm prints and handwritings, these are not protected by the Fourth Amendment”
Summary of this case from Williams v. BerryOpinion
No. 06-4050-01-CR-C-SOW.
January 11, 2008
ORDER
Before this Court is the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate William A. Knox regarding defendant's Motion to Suppress (Doc. #40) and defendant's Amended Motion to Suppress (Doc. #60). The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate in this case is both thorough and well-reasoned. This Court agrees with this recommendation and sees no reason to comment further. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that defendant's Motion to Suppress (Doc. #40) and defendant's Amended Motion to Suppress (Doc. #60) are granted in part and denied in part. It is further
ORDERED that defendant Teter's motions to suppress are denied as to his statements made at the July 8, 2005 interview; on his finger and palm prints, handwriting samples, and photographs; and statements made at the March 15 and 22, 2005 interviews for use by the prosecution for purposes of impeachment at trial. It is further
ORDERED that defendant Teter's motions to suppress are granted as to statements made at the March 15 and 22, 2005 interviews for purposes of the prosecution's case-in-chief.