Opinion ID: 2977642
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: motion to dismiss superseding indictment

Text: Before trial, defendants moved to dismiss the superseding indictment, alleging selective prosecution, entrapment, outrageous government conduct, and defects in the search warrant of Abrar’s home. Evidence in support of the motions was scheduled to be heard at a pretrial hearing. At the opening of the hearing, however, defendants waived their right to present evidence and instead asked the court to decide their motion on the pleadings. Thereafter, the district court denied the motion from the bench, explaining that “there is not one bit of evidence that has been presented to this Court to support any of those characterizations of the conduct, negative conduct, allegedly, by the Government in this case.” Suppression Tr. at 137-38. Defendants waived their opportunity to meet their burden by waiving the evidentiary hearing as to their motion to dismiss. This left the district court with only conclusory, otherwise unsupported allegations in the pleadings. On this record, the district court was correct to deny the motion to dismiss the superseding indictment for want of any supporting evidence.