Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Robinson

United States District Court, E.D. New York

April 10, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
TYRONE ROBINSON, Defendant.

          United States Attorney's Office, Eastern District of New York By: Allen Lee Bode, Assistant U.S. Attorney

          Federal Defenders of New York, Inc. Attorneys for the Defendant By: LaKeytria W. Felder, Esq., Mildred M. Whalen, Esq., Michael Daniel Weil, Esq., Of Counsel

          MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER

          ARTHUR D. SPATT United States District Judge

         On October 19, 2016, the Defendant Tyrone Robinson (the “Defendant”) was indicted on numerous charges related to a series of violent home invasion robberies. The Government filed a superseding indictment on March 15, 2017. Presently before the Court is a motion by the Government, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure (“Fed. R. Crim. P.” or “Rule”) 17 to quash four so ordered subpoenas requesting police reports of those robberies from the Nassau County Police Department (the “NCPD”) and the Suffolk County Police Department (the “SCPD”). For the following reasons, the Government's motion is granted.

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. The Relevant Facts

         The Defendant is charged with numerous crimes stemming from a series of violent home invasion robberies that occurred between August 2015 and May 2016 in Nassau and Suffolk counties. One alleged co-conspirator, Joshua Leader, has been apprehended and charged. Several alleged co-conspirators have not yet been apprehended.

         B. Relevant Procedural History

         On February 17, 2017, the Court so ordered three subpoenas requesting “all police reports” for a robbery that allegedly occurred at a specific date, time and place from the NCPD and the SCPD. The subpoenas further instructed the police departments to “[i]nclude Arrest Reports, case, incident and supplemental reports and inventory slips.” One of the subpoenas also stated to “include all police contact at this location.” On March 13, 2017, the Court so ordered a fourth subpoena which demanded all of the same information for three other alleged robberies.

         On March 15, 2017, the Government filed a motion to quash the subpoenas. The Defendant responded on March 22, 2017. On March 29, 2017, the Government filed a reply brief which included affidavits and letters from representatives of the NCPD and SCPD who represented that they joined in the Government's motion to quash the subpoenas.

         II. DISCUSSION

         A. The Relevant Law

         Criminal subpoenas are generally governed by Rule 17, which states that “[a] subpoena may order the witness to produce any books, papers, documents, data, or other objects the subpoena designates. The court may direct the witness to produce the designated items in court before ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.