W.D.La.: Def was uninvited guest without standing

The USMJ found defendant was an uninvited guest in the place searched who lacked standing. The evidence supports the findings. Hearsay is admissible in suppression hearings, but it doesn’t matter; if it were removed, it doesn’t change the outcome. United States v. Pea, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46459 (W.D. La. Mar. 17, 2020)*:

Pea concedes that his name was removed from the lease on Montgomery’s residence the month prior to this incident, but insists he was an invited guest nonetheless, explaining that it is plausible that he and Montgomery had reconciled. He points to three facts in support of this contention: (1) that Montgomery has a history of reconciling with him, namely after he shot her in the back in 2005 while she was pregnant with his child; (2) in May of 2018, his name was on the house’s lease with Montgomery, showing they were together in some sense of the term at that time, though Pea’s name was removed from the lease that December; and (3) on the day before the search of Montgomery’s house, Montgomery and Pea were together in Mansfield with two of their children. Pea asserts that these three facts are “adequate evidence that he and [Montgomery] had reconciled and that he was invited over on January 13, 2019” and also that the officers’ testimony to the contrary should not be accorded the same weight as his testimony on this point. Record Document 30, p. 3.

This Court disagrees. …

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.