United States of America v. Edgar Adam Matos
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
2009 WL 2883054 (2009)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
A team of law enforcement officers from the United States Marshal Service Fugitive Task Force (FTF), including Detective Heege and Deputy Tait, staked out Edgar Matos’s (defendant) apartment in pursuit of Edgar’s cousin, Anthony Matos, who was wanted for murder. When Edgar exited the apartment, he allegedly voluntarily dropped two bags of cocaine in plain view, prompting Heege and Tait to arrest him. Then, without being read his Miranda warnings, Edgar allegedly made spontaneous and voluntary incriminating statements and consented to a search of his apartment, during which FTF officers found cocaine. Edgar was charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Edgar moved to suppress the evidence, arguing it was the result of an unconstitutional arrest. At the evidence-suppression hearing, Heege and Tait testified they had probable cause to arrest Edgar because they saw Edgar voluntarily throw two bags of cocaine on the ground in their plain view. Heege and Tait further testified that Edgar voluntarily and spontaneously told officers where to find the additional cocaine hidden in his apartment. The trial court held that (1) Tait and Heege’s testimony regarding Edgar’s voluntarily incriminating actions was not credible; and (2) Edgar was arrested without probable cause. The trial court issued an order suppressing all evidence. The government (plaintiff) moved to void the suppression order. At a supplemental suppression hearing, additional FTF officers testified to seeing the bags of cocaine on the ground outside Edgar’s apartment, but no one except Heege and Tait testified to seeing Edgar toss those bags on the ground. Further, additional testimony indicated that Edgar was arrested only to give FTF officers an excuse to search Edgar’s apartment for Anthony, FTF’s real target.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Garaufis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.