UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
BRUCE WAYNE JOHNSON, APPELLANT

8th Cir. | 1980-02-19
No. 79-1997
Before GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge, and HEANEY and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judges.
614 F.2d 622 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1980) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief from the waiver of a pre-trial motion to suppress evidence.


Facts & Procedural History

The defendant was convicted of illegal firearm possession and sought to suppress evidence post-trial. He conceded failing to file a pre-trial motion t…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a conviction on three counts of illegal possession of firearms under 18 U.S.C. app. § 1202(a)(1) and 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d) and (i). The sole issue is whether the district court1 erred in denying the defendant’s post-trial motion to strike testimony from the record and suppress evidence. We affirm.

The defendant concedes that a motion to suppress was not filed prior to trial as is required by Rule 12(b)(3) and Rule 41 of Fed.R.Crim.P. Failure to file such a motion prior to trial constitutes a waiver of that defense. Rule 12(f), Fed.R.Crim.P. The defendant contends, however, that the district court abused its discretion in denying him relief from the waiver. He argues that inadvertence of counsel and/or the plain error doctrine are sufficient causes for the court to have granted the requested relief.

We disagree. It is apparent that, at the end of trial, the defendant changed his trial strategy (and added new counsel). At trial, his defense was to attack the sufficiency of the evidence. After trial, he attempted a defense strategy of suppressing the evidence. We cannot say, on this record, that the district court abused its discretion in holding that there was no good cause compelling it to grant relief of the waiver. The district court is affirmed.

. The Honorable H. Kenneth Wangelin of the Eastern District of Missouri.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw