Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :07-cr-00063-JJF Document 26 Filed 10/O4/2007 Page 1 of 2
,___ _ _, U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney ’s Ojjice
- District of Delaware
Nemours Building (302) 573-62 77 .
7 1007 Orange Street, Suite 700 FAX (302) 5 73-6220
P. O. Box 2046
Wilmington, Delaware 19899-2046
October 4, 2007
‘ The Honorable Joseph J. Faman, Jr. p
United States District Judge 7
P District of Delaware
‘ 844 King Street `
Wilmington, DE l980l
p Re: United States v. Aaron L. Hurtt
Criminal Action No. 07-63-JJF
* Dear Judge Farnan:
This letter concerns the defendant’s Motion to Suppress Statements (D.l. 16). The Court held
a Suppression Hearing concerning defendant’s motion on August 22, 2007. On September 27, 2007,
Mr. Bostic filed a letter with the Coiut, indicating that he did not intend to file a post-hearing brief,
and that based on the facts presented at the Suppression Hearing, he could find no basis to further
y challenge the statement of his client to ATF Special Agent Diane Iardella on April 22, 2007 — the ‘ 1
subject of the motion in question} (DJ. 25). Further, Mr. Bostic indicated that the defendant
intends to enter a plea to the charges against him. The government and the defense are currently ;
working on terms for a Memorandum of Plea Agreement in this matter, but it is not yet final. ‘
Accordingly, since the government’s post-hearing brief is due today, if the Court elects to rule on _
. defendant’s motion, the government submits the following to supplement its initial Response to i'
Def`endant’s Motion to Suppress Statements GDI. 20). F`
The evidence presented at the Suppression Hearing clearly indicates that the defendant was l
given the warnings required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), and that he voluntarily T
waived his rights before speaking with Special Agent lardella. Specifically, Officer Thomas
` Ragonese ofthe Wilmington Police Department testified that he personally witnessed another officer
S with his department, Officer Alex Shupp, read the defendant his Miranda rights verbatim from a card
` in his pocket (Government’s Exh. 2), and that the defendant indicated that he understood those rights
and wished to give a statement. @1. 24 at pp. l2-16). Further, Officer Ragonese testified that there ` I
were no circumstances surrounding the defendant’s waiver that would calllinto question whether or _`
_ _ 1 At the Suppression Hearing, Mr. Bostic expressly limited his motion to this statement. _
(D.I. 24 at pp. 3-4). - _ ‘ *

i Case 1 :07-cr-00063-JJF Document 26 Filed 10/O4/2007 Page 2 of 2
I not it was voluntary. (D.I. 25 at pp. 9-12 (indicating that the defendant was not handcuffed, did not
y appear to be under the influence of alcohol or medication, did not complain of any pain, and was
A only interviewed for approximately 18 minutes)). None of Officer Ragonese’s testimony was
controverted; indeed, it is corroborated by Defendant’s Exhibit 2 — the non-audio videotape of the
interview in question. Accordingly, defendant’s Motion to Suppress Statements should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
COLM F. CONNOLLY
. United States Attorney
I - I BY: /s/ Shawn A. Weede
- ‘ Shawn A. Weede
‘ Assistant United States Attorney
cc: Edson A. Bostic, Esq. I