Order — No. 2:20-cr-00231 (Dkt. 52, D. Nev.)

Summary

An order in United States v. Brandon Casutt, Case No. 2:20-cr-00231-APG-NJK, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, filed October 1, 2021 as Document 52 (2 pages), with the signature block of Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe. The Court denies the defendant's motion (Docket No. 50) for leave to file Exhibit F to his motion to suppress under seal, because Exhibit F consists of two search warrant applications and an affidavit, and the affidavit was ordered unsealed on August 31, 2020. The Clerk's Office is instructed to unseal the document at Docket No. 51.

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

Full text

             Case 2:20-cr-00231-APG-NJK Document 52 Filed 10/01/21 Page 1 of 2




 1
 2
 3                               UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 4                                         DISTRICT OF NEVADA
 5
 6    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                             Case No.: 2:20-cr-00231-APG-NJK
 7                            Plaintiff,                                 ORDER
 8    v.                                                             (Docket No. 50)
 9    BRANDON CASUTT,
10                           Defendant.
11           Pending before the Court is Defendant Brandon Casutt’s motion for leave to file Exhibit F
12 to his motion to suppress under seal. Docket No. 50. See also Docket No. 51 (Exhibit F).
13 Defendant submits that Exhibit F “contains a search warrant that is currently under seal.” Docket
14 No. 50 at 1. Therefore, Defendant asks the Court, out of an abundance of caution, to allow him to
15 file the exhibit under seal until the United States moves to unseal the document. Id.
16           Exhibit F consists of two search warrant applications by telephone or other reliable
17 electronic means and an affidavit in support of them. See Docket No. 51. Further, the search
18 warrant applications were never sealed; rather, it was the affidavit that was issued under seal. Id.
19 Finally, a review of the docket clearly shows that the affidavit was ordered unsealed by the Court
20 more than a year ago, on August 31, 2020. Docket No. 1, 2:20-mj-00667-BNW; Docket No. 1,
21 2:20-mj-00668-BNW. 1
22 . . . .
23 . . . .
24 . . . .
25
26
   1
27 party’s The Court expects parties to make accurate representations in all filings before it. When a
           representations can be clarified by a simple viewing of an online docket, no reason exists
28 for an inaccurate statement to be made. The Court expects better advocacy in the future.

                                                     1
          Case 2:20-cr-00231-APG-NJK Document 52 Filed 10/01/21 Page 2 of 2




 1        Accordingly, Defendant’s sole reason for filing Exhibit F under seal does not exist;
 2 therefore, the Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to seal this exhibit. Docket No. 50. The Court
 3 INSTRUCTS the Clerk’s Office to UNSEAL the document at Docket No. 51.
 4        IT IS SO ORDERED.
 5        DATED: October 1, 2021.
 6
 7                                            NANCY J. KOPPE
                                              UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

                                                 2


File and source

File

52.pdf

Size

124,576 bytes

SHA-256

9a978b476196db538fe6d40603e640c29d8349f9f11c775810206e6198d77569

Our copy

52.pdf

Original

No public link identified.