Case ID: f2d_725/html/0633-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Harry REEH, Arlington Douglas Sprecher, Theodore Duane Jorden and Michael Ryan, Defendants-Appellants.
    No. 82-6024.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Feb. 24, 1984.
    Carlton & Carlton, Philip Carlton, Jr., Thomas A. Wells, University of Miami, School of Law, Miami, Fla., for Reeh, Sprecher, Jorden and Ryan.
    Stanley Marcus, U.S. Atty., James G. Adams, III, Joseph R. Buchanan, Paul A. DiPaolo, Asst. U.S. Atty., Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
    Before GODBOLD, Chief Judge, TJO-FLAT and HENDERSON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

In this marijuana case the district court denied a motion to suppress as evidence the seized marijuana. In the subsequent bench trial defendants were found guilty. After a notice of appeal was filed, defendants filed what the district court deemed a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence. The district judge certified to this court that he was disposed to grant the motion should this court remand the case in accordance with the procedure approved in U.S. v. Fuentes-Lozano, 580 F.2d 724, 725-26 (5th Cir.1978) (per curiam).

The case is REMANDED to the district court for its ruling on the motion for new trial.