Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

15-028 - USA v. SHELTON et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
15-028 - USA v. SHELTON et al
May 23, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY ON GOVERNMENT'S SANTIAGO PROFFER in case as to CARLOS SHELTON (1), TERRANCE BRASHER (7), BRANDY GUM (11) - The Court finds the proffer is sufficient for present purposes. The co-conspirator statements summarized by the Government in its proffer are hereby conditionally admitted pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Evidence at the trial of this matter, subject to the Defendants' right to later object if the proffered evidence does not materialize. Further, nothing in this Order precludes the Court's ability to divert from these preliminary findings based on evidence produced at trial. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/23/2017. (LBT)ENTRY ON GOVERNMENT'S SANTIAGO PROFFER in case as to CARLOS SHELTON (1), TERRANCE BRASHER (7), BRANDY GUM (11) - The Court finds the proffer is sufficient for present purposes. The co-conspirator statements summarized by the Government in its proffer are hereby conditionally admitted pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Evidence at the trial of this matter, subject to the Defendants' right to later object if the proffered evidence does not materialize. Further, nothing in this Order precludes the Court's ability to divert from these preliminary findings based on evidence produced at trial. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/23/2017. (LBT)ENTRY ON GOVERNMENT'S SANTIAGO PROFFER in case as to CARLOS SHELTON (1), TERRANCE BRASHER (7), BRANDY GUM (11) - The Court finds the proffer is sufficient for present purposes. The co-conspirator statements summarized by the Government in its proffer are hereby conditionally admitted pursuant to Rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Evidence at the trial of this matter, subject to the Defendants' right to later object if the proffered evidence does not materialize. Further, nothing in this Order precludes the Court's ability to divert from these preliminary findings based on evidence produced at trial. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/23/2017. (LBT)
August 29, 2017
PDF | More
ENTRY ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS - The Court determines that there is no need to set this matter for a Franks hearing and DENIES Brasher's Motion to Suppress (Filing No. 587). See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/29/2017. (MAT)
April 3, 2018
PDF | More
ENTRY DENYING MOTION TO MODIFY PROTECTIVE ORDER - For the reasons stated above, Brasher has failed to meet his burden to show good cause for modification of the Protective Order. Accordingly, Brasher's Motion to Modify Protective Order (Filing No. 789) is DENIED. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/3/2018. (MAT)
April 11, 2018
PDF | More
ENTRY DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL AND MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL - 785 Motion for Judgment of Acquittal as to TERRANCE BRASHER (7) and 786 Motion for New Trial as to TERRANCE BRASHER (7) are DENIED. This matter remains set for sentencing on Friday, April 20, 2018, at 1:30 p.m. in Courtroom 200, Lee H. Hamilton Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 121 West Spring Street, New Albany, Indiana. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/11/2018.(LBT)