|Judge||Case Type||Case Name||Date Filed|
|Judge Linda R. Reade|
|-||USA v. Patrie, Court sentencing memorandum ||06/12/2014|
|-||U.S. v. James Sumner; Order granting in part and denying in part the defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial.
The court found that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's guilty verdict as to Count 1; however, the court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's guilty verdicts as to Count 2 through 4. In the event that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the court's ruling as to Count 1, the court granted the defendant's motion for new trial as to that count.
|-||USA v. Sigillito et al, Court sentencing memorandum||12/20/2012|
|-||U.S. v. Donald K. Washburn; order denying defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial. The court found that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's guilty verdicts as to Counts 1-8, 10-30 and 31-49. The court further found that the interests of justice did not require the court to grant defendant a new trial.||05/21/2012|
|-||U.S. v. Sholom Rubashkin; sentencing memorandum||06/21/2010|
|-||U.S. v. Thomas J. Woods; sentencing memorandum regarding restitution to victim of child pornography offenses||03/03/2010|
|-||U.S. v. Sholom Rubashkin; Order denying defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal and motion for new trial||03/01/2010|
|-||U.S. v. Kevin Kruse; Defendant who pled guilty to one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a minor sentenced to 470 months of imprisonment after applying 2G2.1 and 4B1.5.||05/26/2009|
|-||U.S. v. Heather Fiorella a/k/a Heather Gonsorcik; Defendant who pled guilty to three counts of possession of child pornography sentenced to 360 months' imprisonment after district court found she obstructed justice and upheld USSG 2G2.1 against Kimbrough v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 558 (2007) challenge.||02/11/2009|
|-||U.S. v. Sean Merrill; court held that child pornographer was not subject to sentencing enhancement for distribution, where defendant did not disseminate child pornography to others but instead only moved it from one electronic device to another||09/26/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Mack Davis; court held defendant was career offender, based in part upon prior conviction for Indecent Contact With a Child, in violation of Iowa Code Section 709.12(4) (1993)||09/17/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Orlando Birbragher, Marshall Neil Kanner, Douglas Willis Bouchey, Armando Angulo and Peter Colon Lopez; order on motion to dismiss||07/22/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Roger Waldner; court sentenced defendant to 120 months imprisonment on his pleas of guilty to two counts of bankruptcy fraud, arising out of In Re H & W Motor Express Co, No. 02-2017 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa Jun. 12, 2002||07/07/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Lamont William Papakee; court's sentencing memorandum; court held that sexual abuse in Indian Country is a crime of violence for purposes of career offender finding and held alternative variance permissible after Gall v. United States||04/24/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Ronald Coleman; sentencing memorandum holding that defendant's prior Iowa conviction for drug tax stamp violation was a prior felony drug conviction for purposes of 21 U.S.C. §§841 & 851||04/01/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Chris Pipkin; ordering defendant to make restitution despite an order of discharge over the restitution in bankruptcy court||02/19/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Charles Thomas; order regarding constitutionality of the sex offender registration provisions of the Adam Walsh Act||02/13/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Charles Warthan; sentencing memorandum opinion; court calculated defendant's advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. Minor role adjustment did not apply, upward departure for number of victims applied, downward departure for discharged term of imprisonment did not apply.||02/07/2008|
|-||U.S. v. Linda Darcell Gilbert; sentencing memorandum opinion||07/24/2007|
|-||United States v. Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi; motion to dismiss on due process grounds; denying defendant's motion; finding no Fifth Amendment violations due to outrageous government conduct or prosecutorial misconduct; declining defendant's invitation to use the court's supervisory power to dismiss the two-count indictment.
|-||United States v. Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi; motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 48(b); denying defendant's motion; finding no prejudicial preindictment delay in the government's presentation of the charges to the grand jury; and finding no unnecessary post-indictment delay due, mainly, to defendant's own requests for trial continuances.
|-||United States v. Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi; motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds; denying defendant's motion; finding that the double jeopardy principles were not implicated because defendant was convicted in the Eastern District of Michigan on a terrorism count and a document fraud count, and then, after trial, the charges were dismissed in post-trial proceedings; alternatively holding that the offenses in the prior indictment and the instant indictment were not the "same" for purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause.
|-||U.S. v. Robert Earl Cole; sentencing memorandum opinion||07/03/2007|
|-||United States v. Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi; motion to subpoena trial witnesses pursuant to Rule 104; denying defendant's motion; determining that the proposed testimony of a district court judge, a United States Attorney and a defense attorney was not admissible; and declining to issue trial subpoenas for each.
|-||U.S. v. James Howard Bentley; sentencing memorandum opinion||06/25/2007|
|-||U.S. v. Michael Edward Kowal; order on motion to dismiss, bench trial and motion for judgment of acquittal. The court denied the motion to dismiss and motion for judgment of acquittal, and it found defendant GUILTY on Counts 5 and 7, which charged the defendant with aggravated identity theft in violation in 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1). The court found that the term "person" in § 1028A(a)(1) includes all human beings, regardless of whether they are living at the time their identity is stolen and used. It found that the defendant's use of a decedent's surname and birth month constituted the defendant's use of the "means of identification of another person," and it rejected the defendant's claim that he changed his name through his Iowa marriage.||05/15/2007|
|-||U.S. v. David Evan Starr; sentencing memorandum opinion||05/15/2007|
|-||U.S. v. Lamont William Papakee and Connie Frances Blackcloud; order finding federal criminal jurisdiction over alleged sex crimes at Meskwaki Settlement||05/02/2007|
|-||U.S. v. James Howard Bentley; Rule 414 order, admitting evidence of prior offenses of child molestation in child pornography prosecution.||02/21/2007|
|-||United States v. Abdel-Ilah Elmardoudi; motion to dismiss on statute of limitations and pre-indictment delay grounds; denying defendant's motion; holding that the conspiracy to commit document fraud charge and the fraudulent use of a social security number charge in the indictment were not barred by the statute of limitations; and holding that there was no violation of the Fifth Amendment due process clause due to unreasonable pre-indictment delay because defendant could not show actual or substantial prejudice.
|-||U.S. v. B.H.; declaratory judgment finding that defendant was committed to a mental institution and, therefore, ordering his weapons and ammunition destroyed.,U.S. v. B.H.; declaratory judgment finding that defendant was committed to a mental institution and, therefore, ordering his weapons and ammunition destroyed.||12/07/2006|
|-||U.S. v. James Joseph Sheridan; Court denied defendant's motion to dismiss a one-count indictment which charged defendant with knowingly possessing a stolen firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(j). The court concluded that defendant's Fifth Amendment right to due process right was not violated. It found there was no vindictive prosecution or unreasonable pre-indictment delay. ||11/16/2006|
|-||US v. Bradford; sentencing memorandum opinion on plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin, upward departure imposed because, during the conspiracy, defendant also sold heroin resulting in death||11/08/2006|
|-||US v. Brion Johnson; pretrial matters on remand for child pornography charges, interpreting Adam Walsh Act
,US v. Brion Johnson; pretrial matters on remand for child pornography charges, interpreting Adam Walsh Act
|-||U.S. v. August L. Holthaus, Jr.; sentencing memorandum opinion resolving advisory guidelines calculation issues relating to loss in bankruptcy proceeding and whether a bankruptcy trustee may recover restutition under the MVRA.||07/07/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Mark Lou Meyer; Order revoking defendant's probation after he violated his conditions of probation by traveling out-of-state without permission and by having eight positive sweat patch test results||07/07/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Daniel P. Mitchell; sentencing memorandum opinion||06/22/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Kent Raymond Platter; Order denying defendant's motion to dismiss alternate counts pursuant to United States v. Richardson, 439 F.3d 421 (8th Cir. 2006); the court declined to compel the government to elect between multiplicitous counts under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and (3).
|-||U.S. v. Steven Bradford; Order granting defendant's motion for specific enforcement of a plea agreement and dismissing the indictment.||06/02/2006|
|-||U.S. v. L.M. (a juvenile) Order on government's motion to transfer proceedings||04/12/2006|
|-||U.S. v. L.M. (a juvenile); Order granting in part and denying in part government's motion to permit victims access to information and proceedings||03/31/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Shaun Joseph Ruff; Order re remand from Eighth Circuit regarding restitution and double recovery||02/02/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Shaun Joseph Ruff; Order denying defendant's motion for recusal||01/25/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Daniel P. Mitchell; Order granting defendant's motion for new trial||01/04/2006|
|-||U.S. v. Kevin Patrick O'Connell; Order setting aside magistrate judge's report and recommendation re motion to suppress||12/07/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Jose De Jesus Ibarra-Castaneda, Luis Armando Varela-Arteaga, Hacienda Las Glorias, Inc., Mexico of Cedar Rapids, Inc., Cuatro, Inc. and Hot Springs, Inc.; Order re defendants' motion for recusal||10/31/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Jeremy Ray Hall; Order re defendant's motion to suppress||10/13/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Araceli Martinez; Order on defendant's motion to recuse||09/07/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Scott W. Meiner; Order regarding motion to suppress||08/16/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Craig Allen Thomas; Order regarding defendant's motion to suppress||08/08/2005|
|-||U.S. v. David L. Taylor, Jr.; Order regarding motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence||04/28/2005|
|-||U.S. v. David L. Taylor, Jr.; Order regarding motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence||04/28/2005|
|-||U.S. v. Maurice Wilkins; Court denied defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea based on alleged ineffective assistance of counsel
|-||U.S. v. Eddie Denton; In a case involving an individual who injured his head after committing the crime but before being indicted, the court found, based on medical evidence, trial counsel's testimony, the defendant's childrens' affidavits, and the court's own recollection of the defendant's trial testimony and demeanor, the defendant received due process and was competent to stand trial and to assist in his defense.
|-||U.S. v. Billy Gene Howard; motion for judgment of acquittal and for new trial (case charging defendant with being a felon in possession of a firearm, knowingly possessing stolen firearms, and being an unlawful user of methamphetamine in possession of firearms, defendant alleged the evidence connecting him with a burglary in which firearms were stolen was insufficient to support the inference he stole the firearms and the evidence indicated defendant's brother was responsible for the guns being in defendant’s van; jury convicted on all 3 counts; court accepted verdict and denied motions for new trial and acquittal)||01/07/2004|
|-||U.S. v. Leppert; motion to suppress evidence seized from his residence pursuant to search warrant; officers received information from previously-untested informant who told them Leppert had sold him methamphetamine at Leppert's residence that day and he had previously seen Leppert sell one-half gram of methamphetamine for a shotgun; reliable CI had told officers approximately one week prior to the search that he knew Leppert was "staying" at the residence and he corroborated other informant's testimony about the shotgun exchange; analysis of whether (1) search warrant for residence was supported by probable cause that Leppert was residing at the house searched and evidence of a crime would be found at the house; (2) officers nonetheless acted reasonably under the Leon good faith exception in relying on the warrant
|-||U.S. v. Altedias Campbell; Order on motion for new trial||11/19/2003|
|-||U.S. v. Curtis Swayze; Order on motion for new trial||11/18/2003|
|-||United States v. Jesse Hephner and Shannon Kramarczyk; motion to suppress; (Order regarding report and recommendation concerning motion to suppress; probable cause supported initial stop; moving of truck prior to search was reasonable; search did not exceed scope of defendant’s consent; length of stop was not longer than necessary to effectuate purpose of stop; drug dog’s positive indication during sniff provided probable cause for search of truck and toolbox; defendant was not in custody when he made statements prior to being given Miranda warnings; and statement made after invocation of right to counsel was inadmissible.)
|-||U.S. v. Wade Wilson; motion to suppress evidence seized during traffic stop; officers followed defendant’s vehicle after he stopped briefly at an apartment building where officers were about to execute a search warrant; officers initially pulled over defendant’s vehicle because valid registration not displayed; officers saw proper registration tag as they approached the vehicle; analysis of whether: (1) search warrant authorizing the search of “all vehicles registered to anyone known to reside at [an apartment]" of a multi-unit building is unconstitutional; (2) probable cause dissipated once officer saw registration tag; (3) leaving multi-unit apartment building where one apartment unit is a suspected crack house, with no other suspicious circumstances, constitutes reasonable suspicion; (4) consent removed taint of unlawful detention
|Judge Paul A. Zoss|
|Judge Donald E. O'Brien|
|Judge Leonard T. Strand|