Government’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Amend Motion to Suppress Evidence — No. 3:23-cr-30023 (Dkt. 46, C.D. Ill.)

Summary

The Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Amend Motion to Suppress Evidence, # 46, filed March 6, 2026 in United States v. Eric Johnson, Case No. 23-CR-30023 (3:23-cr-30023-CRL), in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Springfield Division. The government states that the May 2, 2023 indictment charges one count of possession with intent to distribute marijuana, one count of possessing a firearm during and in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime and one count of possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. It says it does not object to the defendant's being able to amend his motion to suppress, which challenges a traffic stop, but objects to the amended motion and requests time to respond.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Cite this document

“Government’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Amend Motion to Suppress Evidence — No. 3:23-cr-30023 (Dkt. 46, C.D. Ill.).” Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/government-s-response-to-defendant-s-motion-to-amend-motion-to-suppres-91ca2fd917/, SHA-256 96ea994fd837d49858890b44eed4b89f8812b4e9be88af993028686ca15a61d8.

Full text

3:23-cr-30023-CRL # 46 Filed: 03/06/26 Page 1 of 5
E-FILED
Friday, 06 March, 2026 10:05:06 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No. 23-CR-30023
)
ERIC JOHNSON, )
)
Defendant. )

GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO AMEND MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE

The United States of America by Gregory M. Gilmore, Acting

United States Attorney for the Central District of Illinois, and

Matthew Weir, Assistant United States Attorney, in response to the

defendant’s motion to suppress evidence states the following:

1. The Grand Jury returned an indictment on May 2, 2023,

charging the defendant with one count of possession with intent to

distribute marijuana, one count of possessing a firearm during and

in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, and one count of

possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. R.1.

2. On September 23, 2025, the defendant filed a motion to

suppress evidence, alleging that the traffic stop of the defendant’s
3:23-cr-30023-CRL # 46 Filed: 03/06/26 Page 2 of 5

vehicle was not supported by the facts and that the subsequent

search of the defendant’s vehicle was unconstitutional. Among

other arguments, the defendant claimed that the defendant’s traffic

stop was unlawful because the officer stopped the defendant for

failing to stop at a stop sign on private property. This, the defendant

claimed, was an unlawful basis to stop the defendant.

3. On October 8, 2025, the government filed its response to

the defendant’s motion to suppress. In response to the defendant’s

claim about the reason for the defendant’s traffic stop, the

government clarified that the officer stopped the defendant for

failing to yield when leaving a parking lot, building, or alleyway,

before entering a roadway.

4. Though the defendant was aware of the government’s

filing, he elected not to file anything setting forth a challenge to the

government’s response. Prior to the hearing, which began on

February 25, 2026, the defendant did not file anything challenging

the basis for the traffic stop asserted by the government in its

response.

2
3:23-cr-30023-CRL # 46 Filed: 03/06/26 Page 3 of 5

ARGUMENT

The Court has wide discretion to oversee cases before it. Part

of that discretion includes the manner in which motions are to be

filed, and hearings conducted. Local Rule 47.1(A)(1) states: “Every

motion raising a question of law must include a memorandum

identifying the specific points or propositions of law and supporting

authorities upon which the moving party relies.” Part of the reason

for this rule is to put the opposing party on notice of what will be

argued when a hearing on the motion occurs.

It is well established that an argument not raised during a

suppression hearing in the district court is waived on appeal.

United States v. McMillian, 786 F.3d 630, 636 (7th Cir. 2015). While

this is not directly on point, it stresses the importance of properly

raising suppression issues before the district court. Ultimately, the

defense did raise this issue before the Court and because the

hearing on the motion to suppress was continued, the government

has time to address the newly raised issue. While the Court

definitely has the authority to dismiss an issue that was not raised

in a timely fashion, out of fairness to the defendant and to make a

complete record, the government does not object to the defendant’s

3
3:23-cr-30023-CRL # 46 Filed: 03/06/26 Page 4 of 5

motion to file an amended motion to suppress, raising a challenge

to the traffic stop under new grounds. Though the government does

not object to the defendant’s being able to amend his motion to

suppress, it does object to the amended motion to suppress. The

government requests time to respond fully to the original motion

and the amended motion at the conclusion of the hearing.

Respectfully submitted,

GREGORY M. GILMORE
ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/ Matthew Z. Weir
Matthew Z. Weir, IL Bar No. 6304257
Assistant United States Attorney
United States Attorney’s Office
318 South 6th Street
Springfield, IL 62701
Telephone: 217-492-4450
Email: matthew.weir@usdoj.gov

4
3:23-cr-30023-CRL # 46 Filed: 03/06/26 Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on March 6, 2026, I electronically filed the

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system,

which will send notification of such filing to counsel of record.

/s/ Matthew Z. Weir
Matthew Z. Weir
Assistant United States Attorney

File and source

File: 46.pdf
Size: 123,739 bytes
SHA-256: 96ea994fd837d49858890b44eed4b89f8812b4e9be88af993028686ca15a61d8
Our copy: 46.pdf
Original: No public link identified.