USA v. Camacho

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff 4:21-cr-40042
vs. ORDER
RAY NOEL CAMACHO,SR.,
Defendant
Pending before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Reconsider(Doc. 68)the
Court's Order denying(Doc. 64)the Defendant's Motion to Suppress Statements
(Doc. 61, 62). The Government resists the Motion(Doc. 72) and the Defendant
has replied(Doc. 82). For the reasons that follow, the Court grants the Motion for
Reconsideration.
Magistrate Judge Duffy granted Defendant's motion to proceed pro se on
January 19,2022(Doc. 51). The deadline for filing motions had been established
as March 28, 2022.(Doc. 45). Defendant asserts he was unaware ofthe deadline,
did not receive information about it once he had pro se status, and did not have any
ofthe discovery that would have enabled him to timely file.(Doc. 68, 82).
A Defendant seeking reconsideration of denial of a motion must show an
error oflaw or newly discovered evidence, and not simply seek to relitigate an
Case 4:21-cr-40042-LLP Document 90 Filed 08/31/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>

issue. Hagerman v. Yukon Energy Corp., 839 F.2d 407,414(8th Cir. 1988). The
Court must give liberal construction to a pro se litigant's filings. Erickson v.
Pardus, 551 U.S. 89(2007). If the litigant has had the "minimal help necessary" to
prepare filings, that is sufficient. Bear v. Fayram,650 F.3d 1120, 1125 (8th Cir.
2011).
In this case, the Defendant claims he did not have access to the information
needed to file the motion to suppress in a timely fashion. This is a fact-specific
determination based on the pro se litigant's asserted lack of information that,
perhaps, his attorney had but Defendant did not. Therefore, the Court agrees to
reconsider Defendant's Motion to Suppress(Doc. 61,62).
Accordingly,IT IS ORDERED that
1. the Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 68)of his Motion to
Suppress(Doc. 61,62)is granted;
2. the Court refers the Defendant's Motion to Suppress to Magistrate Duffy for
further proceedings as necessary.
Dated this day of August, 2022.
BY THE COURT:
Lawrence L.	^awrence L. Piersol
United States District Judge
Case 4:21-cr-40042-LLP Document 90 Filed 08/31/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>