Opinion
CRIMINAL NO. 5:07-cr-68 (WDO).
November 14, 2007
ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Suppress (Docs. 19, 20). It appears to the Court that the Motion was filed before the Government provided complete discovery. As a result the Motion lacks specific allegations of fact to support Defendant's allegations that his constitutional rights were violated. See United States v. Richardson, 764 F.2d 1514, 1527 (11th Cir. 1985) ("A motion to suppress must in every critical respect be sufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural to enable the court to conclude that a substantial claim is presented."). It further appears that the Government has since fulfilled its duty to provide discovery. The Court therefore orders Defendant to amend his Motion to Suppress to include reference to specific facts that support his arguments in light of the discovery that the Government has provided to him. Defendant must amend the Motion no later than November 23, 2007, after which time the Court will proceed to rule on it.
So ordered.