Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Manansingh

United States District Court, D. Nevada

August 31, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
CHANDAN MANANSINGH, Defendant.

          ORDER

          RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         I. Introduction

         Defendant Chandan Manansingh filed a Motion to Suppress on November 4, 2016 regarding a search that was conducted at his residence on April 1, 2016. (ECF No. 36). Manansingh seeks to suppress all evidence obtained from the search because there was no reasonable suspicion to support the search. The Court held evidentiary hearings in March of 2017. On May 26, 2017 the Court issued its oral ruling granting the Motion to Suppress and indicating that it would issue a written order. This written order follows granting Manansingh's Motion to Suppress. (ECF No. 36).

         II. Background

         The Court makes the following findings of fact and holdings.

         A. Procedural Background

         On November 26, 2013 Manansingh was sentenced in the District of Maryland for his conviction for Introduction of Misbranded Drugs into Interstate Commerce with Intent to Defraud or Mislead. He received 36 months of probation. The supervision for Manansingh's probation was transferred to this District on March 18, 2015.

         On December 4, 2015, judgment (the “December 4 Judgment”) was entered against Manansingh for violating the conditions of his probation and sentencing him to 77 days of custody. The December 4 Judgment included a supervised release condition which prohibited Manansingh from using legal or illegal steroids that are associated with increasing physical strength. On January 6, 2016, judgment (the “January 6 Judgement”) was again entered against Manansingh for violating the conditions of his supervised release and he was sentenced to time served with twelve months of supervised release. The January 6 Judgment included, inter alia, a condition of supervised release authorizing a warrantless search of Manansingh's residence based upon “reasonable suspicion of contraband or evidence of a violation of a condition of supervision.” The January 6 Judgment also include a no steroid condition. The conditions for these two judgments are incorporated by reference into this Order.

         Manansingh has never contended that he was unaware of all of his conditions of supervised release for the December 4 Judgment and the January 6 Judgment. The Court finds that he was fully aware of all of the conditions of supervised release for these two judgments.

         B. Factual Findings

         The Court held an evidentiary hearing on March 15, 2017. The Court heard the testimony of Probation Officer Shawn Mummey and received documentary evidence. Based upon this hearing and the Court's credibility determinations as to the witness's testimony and the exhibits admitted, the Court makes the following findings of fact.

         Probation officers conducted a search of Manansingh's apartment on April 1, 2016. During this search officers discovered two handgun magazines containing ammunition (bullets) in a bedroom in the apartment.

         On December 9, 2015, Manansingh informed his probation officer Shawn Mummey that he owned an old Mercedes (the “Mercedes”) that he used for transportation. On December 10, 2015, Mummey saw Manansingh at his counseling appointment and saw that he was driving a black BMW (the “BMW”). Manansingh told Mummey that the BMW belonged to Manansingh's fiancé, Ms. Angela Nairns. Manansingh told Mummey that his Mercedes was not working so he needed to drive the BMW. He told Mummey that he did not expect to be driving the BMW regularly in the future. Subsequent to this conversation but before the search in this case, Mummey checked the BMW's registration with the Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and confirmed that it belonged to Nairns. Mummey never received or had any information to suggest that Manansingh could not drive the BMW. Mummey also understood before the search in this case that Manansingh might need to drive the BMW when Manansingh's vehicle was not working. Mummey also knew before the search the identifying information for both vehicles. The Probation Office never received any information that Manansingh regularly or infrequently drove any other vehicles besides the Mercedes and the BMW. Manansingh was truthful with Mummey about the vehicles he was driving and did not mislead or lie to Mummey about what vehicles he drove or the circumstances regarding when he would be driving them. Mummey saw Manansingh driving the BMW to another counseling appointment on March 29, 2016. The Court does not find that, prior to the search, Mummey or the Probation Office were aware of Manansingh's possible failure to note the Mercedes and BMW on his online monthly reports in early 2016. The Court does not even find that such a failure actually occurred. Moreover, Mummey was clearly aware of the cars that Manansingh drove, and Manansingh provided him truthful information about these vehicles as directed.

         Manansingh informed Mummey around June of 2015 that Manansingh had obtained employment as a courier. Manansingh was also seeking to be reinstated as an attorney because his license had been suspended upon his federal conviction. Between June 2015 and the date of the search, Manansingh provided, as requested and required, documentation of his employment as a courier. Manansingh received approximately $500 per month in net income. The Probation Office did not have any information during this period that Manansingh had any other sources of income or assets. Mummey confirmed that Manansingh's residence in an upscale apartment/condominium complex was actually the apartment of his fiancé, Nairns. Mummey confirmed with the management of the complex before the search in this case that Nairns was listed on the lease and that Manansingh was listed ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.