7th Circuit rules specific objection is unnecessary at one-issue suppression hearing.

• Date: 19 February 2007
• Author: Ziemer, David

Byline: David Ziemer

Where there is only one issue at a suppression hearing, a general objection to the magistrate's recommendation suffices to preserve the objection for review, the Seventh Circuit held on Feb. 9. Brandon H. Charles was arrested in 2004 as he fled a house where he had been selling cocaine. After being given Miranda warnings, he was interviewed by Milwaukee police detective Wendall Kurowski. Charles agreed to provide information about his supplier in exchange for what he hoped would be favorable consideration from the local district attorney. During the interview, Charles admitted to selling five rocks of cocaine prior to the arrival of the police, to holding an additional baggie of rock cocaine for a friend, and to having handled a gun that the police found. Charles was not prosecuted in state court, however, but in federal court, for possession of the drugs and the gun. Charles moved to suppress the admission of his statements, and after a hearing, the magistrate judge held Charles' statements were voluntary. Six days later, Charles filed a "motion to review" the magistrate's recommendation. He later filed an objection, seeking de novo review in the district court. District Judge Charles N. Clevert concluded that the objections were too general to satisfy 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), and adopted the recommendation. A jury found Charles guilty of the drug charge, but not the firearm charge, and Charles was sentenced to the 10-year mandatory minimum. Charles appealed the denial of his suppression motion. In a decision by Judge Diane P. Wood, the Seventh Circuit held that...