By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book
SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 30 – A defendant on home confinement awaiting trial on drug charges sought to modify his conditions to a curfew, and have his ankle monitor removed.
On February 15, 2023 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Jed S. Rakoff held a bond hearing. Inner City Press went and covered it.
The defendant had written a three and a half page letter to "Mister Rakoff," saying that he was ignoring his oath and not upholding the Second Amendment right to bear arms.
Judge Rakoff read from the letter, and mused if it might be bear on the factors on bond.
The Federal Defender said it was covered by the First Amendment, and that the ankle monitor was an irritant.
Judge Rakoff, remarking that life can be an irritant sometimes, nevertheless directed the parties to draft a new bond order, with a curfew, albeit in the early evening.
He said, It is my job to apply the law, it does not matter to me if a defendant hates or loves me. Then, deftly, Valentine's Day was mentioned.
On May 30, a suppression hearing was held. Inner City Press was there. Threadette here:
Now Federal Defender cross examines Officer Smalls about his testimony in People v Adams. Judges doubts relevance. Defense tries again... In Adams, gun was suppressed - before Smalls told grand jury in this case that he saw a bulge
Judge: Would a heavy-looking bag be enough? AUSA: Yes. The caller identifed the defendant as her friend.
Judge: Former friend. I can't believe the Supreme Court decided the Bruen case the way it did. But I am bound by it
Judge Rakoff said he - and not ChatGPT - would read the cases, review and video and give at least a bottom line ruling in 10 days, given the August trial date.
The case is US v. Perez, 22-cr-644 (Rakoff)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
