Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Quinney, No. 07-4055

By FindLaw Staff on October 01, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In a conviction for manufacturing and passing counterfeit currency, district court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress key evidence used against him is reversed and remanded where: 1) the inevitable discovery doctrine does not apply to warrantless searches where a warrant could have been obtained based on probable cause; and 2) the case is remanded to evaluate the statements made by defendant to the agents, based on the mistaken belief that the printer was properly admissible evidence, to evaluate whether they should also be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree.   

Read US v. Quinney, No. 07-4055

Appellate Information

Argued: July 31, 2009

Decided and Filed: October 1, 2009


Opinion by Circuit Judge Gilman


For Appellant:  Jeffrey Paul Nunnari, Toledo, Ohio

For Appellee:  David O. Bauer, Assistant United States Attorney, Toledo, Ohio

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard