🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242

Joseph S. Dueker

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri 8 signed orders read

How Judge Dueker decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On a warrantless vehicle search following flight, Dueker resolves suppression on ABANDONMENT: a defendant who flees and abandons a vehicle forfeits his Fourth Amendment expectation of privacy, so the search is lawful without reaching probable cause or inevitable discovery. His abandonment analysis was adopted as consistent with controlling Eighth Circuit precedent. A suppression motion that does not confront the abandonment/flight problem is a weak posture before him.

“As Defendant himself concedes, Judge Dueker's ‘approach is consistent with how the Eighth Circuit has handled abandonment to date,’ and ‘the weight of authority is against’ Defendant's objection.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

United States v. Demarco Brooks
4:23-cr-00554-SEP · 2024-12-27
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence, Doc. [31], is DENIED.”

Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Supplemental Motion to Suppress Evidence, Doc. [52], is DENIED.”

United States v. Erik Elsasser
4:24-cr-00141-SEP · 2025-06-13
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“For the reasons set forth below, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Motion to Suppress be DENIED.”

United States v. Tevin Damyron Brown
4:22-cr-00568 · 2023-09-19
Motion to suppress (Tevin Damyron Brown (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Therefore, the Court recommends that Defendant's Motion to Suppress be denied because the search and recovery of the ammunition in Defendant's pants pocket, as well as the search and recovery of the two (2) firearms seized from an area where Defendant had tossed them, was constitutional as a search incident to arrest.”

Motion to recuse (Tevin Damyron Brown (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“In light of the foregoing, the Court recommends that the District Court deny Defendant's Affidavit of Fact Not a Motion Request and Demand Recuse Judge (ECF No. 79).”

Motions to dismiss (Tevin Damyron Brown (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“As a result, the Court recommends that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute be denied.”

Motions to dismiss (Tevin Damyron Brown (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Accordingly, the Court recommends that the District Court deny Defendant's Affidavit of Fact (Not a Motion) to Dismiss for Lack of Personam [sic] Jurisdiction, Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Lack of Territorial Jurisdiction, Improper Judgment, and Void Judgment (ECF No. 89).”

United States v. Roosevelt Easley
4:22-cr-00555 · 2025-09-11
Motion to suppress (Roosevelt Easley (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Easley's Motion to Suppress Evidence and to Dismiss Superseding Indictment, ECF 172, is DENIED”

Motions to dismiss (Roosevelt Easley (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Easley's Motion to Dismiss Superseding Indictment, ECF 141, is DENIED”

Motions to dismiss (Roosevelt Easley (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Easley's Dismissal Motion for Speedy Trial Violation, ECF 149, is DENIED”

Motions to dismiss (Roosevelt Easley (defendant, pro se)) Denied

“Easley's Motion for Dismissal (Vindictive Prosecution), ECF 151, is DENIED”

United States v. Reginald Hudson
4:23-cr-00680 · 2025-01-27
Motion to suppress (Reginald Hudson (defendant)) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [93] is SUSTAINED, ADOPTED, AND INCORPORATED herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Suppress Evidence [62] is DENIED.”

United States v. Sturgeon Stewart
4:23-cr-00593 · 2025-07-21
Motion for reconsideration (Sturgeon Stewart (defendant)) Granted in part

“THE COURT ORDERS that Defendant Sturgeon Stewart's Motion for Reconsideration of Denial of Defendant's Request for a Hearing Pursuant to Franks v. Delaware is GRANTED, but, as will be more fully outlined in its final Report and Recommendation relating to all pretrial motions, the Court DENIES Stewart's Request for Franks hearing.”

United States v. Sturgeon Stewart
4:23-cr-00593 · 2026-01-08
Motion for new counsel (Sturgeon Stewart (defendant)) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Sturgeon Stewart's Motion for New Counsel (ECF No. 141) be DENIED.”

United States v. Eric R. Jeffers
1:24-cr-00090 · 2024-08-14
Motion to revoke detention order (Eric R. Jeffers (defendant)) Denied

“After de novo review, the Court will adopt the Magistrate Judge's order of detention and reasons as it agrees fully therewith. Accordingly, the Court will deny defendant's motion. ... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion to revoke order of detention [20] is denied.”

Michael B. Politte v. John Mosley
4:22-cv-01169 · 2026-02-18
Habeas corpus 2254 (Michael B. Politte (petitioner)) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner Michael Politte's petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) DENIED. ... IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right and this Court will not issue a Certificate of Appealability.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 86 days (N = 4).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 142 days (N = 1).

Not systematically enumerated; judge commissioned 2023-05. The ~7 Dueker-assigned dockets surfaced span civil-rights (G.E.S. v. Florissant, Vasser v. Washington University), prisoner civil-rights (Parkhurst v. Centurion Medical Services), and a TCPA case (Prosser v. Medica Central Insurance), plus routine criminal magistrate duties (mj complaints/forfeiture). The consent civil cases observed resolved by settlement/voluntary dismissal or administrative consolidation rather than a merits ruling.

Put Judge Dueker's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Dueker actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Dueker's own signed orders and cites them.