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. Dotstry

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

May 26, 2017

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Kendrick Ledelle Dotstry, Defendant.

          Andrew Dunne, United States Attorney for the United States of America.

          F. Clayton Tyler, F. Clayton Tyler, P.A. for Kendrick Ledelle Dotstry.

          ORDER

          SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, United States District Judge

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Objections (“Objs.”) [Doc. No. 35] to the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bowbeer (“R&R”) [Doc. No. 34]. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's Objections are overruled in part and sustained in part.

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. Facts [1]

         On November 19, 2016, Minneapolis police received multiple 911 calls reporting a domestic abuse in progress. (R&R at 2.) The callers stated that someone was pointing a gun with a laser at people in an apartment complex and gave a description of the suspect and his vehicle. (Id. at 2-3.) Officers, including Officer Andrew Schroeder (“Officer Schroeder”), responded and located a vehicle and individual-later identified as Defendant Kendrick Ledelle Dotstry (“Dotstry”)-matching those descriptions. (Id. at 3.)

         The officers initiated a traffic stop, drew their weapons, and gave Dotstry a series of commands to put his hands up, exit the vehicle, and walk backwards toward the squad car. (Id.) Initially, Dotstry did not comply with these commands and ducked down out of sight in his vehicle. (Id.) However, Dotstry did eventually exit the vehicle with his hands up, walked backwards towards the squad car, and knelt on the ground as ordered. (Id.)

         Officer Schroeder was tasked with taking Dotstry into custody. (Id.) He first asked if Dotstry had a gun on his person. (Id.) Dotstry said he did not. (Id.) Then, as Officer Schroeder was handcuffing Dotstry, he asked Dotstry if there was a gun in the vehicle. (Id.) Dotstry did not respond. (Id.) The following exchange then occurred, as Officer Schroeder was in the process of taking Dotstry into custody and the other officers were securing the vehicle:

Officer Schroeder: We got a call you were pointing a gun around.
Dotstry: I was pointing a gun?
Officer Schroeder: That's why we're here
Dotstry: I do have one. There's one in the car.
Officer Schroeder: Is there one in ...

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.