From XXX XXX Pretrial Motions Brief, footnote 2.

If the government fails to provide any contradictory affidavits or declarations, the Court must suppress the statements and the Order of Deportation/Removal based on Mr. XXX XXX’s uncontroverted declarations. See N.D. Local Crim. L.R. 47-2(d) (A(d) Opposition or Reply. Any opposition to a noticed motion shall be served and filed not less than 7 calendar days before the date set for the hearing. Any reply shall be served and filed not less than 4 calendar days before the hearing. Any opposition or reply shall comply with Civil L.R. 7‑3(b), (c) and (d); 7‑4 and 7‑5, with respect to format and length unless otherwise ordered.@); see also N. D. Civ. L. R. 7-5(a) (“7‑5.(a) Affidavit or Declaration Required. Factual contentions made in support of or in opposition to any motion must be supported by an affidavit or declaration and by appropriate references to the record. Extracts from depositions, interrogatory answers, requests for admission and other evidentiary matters must be appropriately authenticated by an affidavit or declaration.”)

If the government does submit declarations and places facts in dispute, this Court must conduct an evidentiary hearing. See, e.g., United States v. DeCesare, 765 F.2d 890, 895‑96 (9th Cir.), as amended 777 F.2d 543 (9th Cir. 1985) ("The sworn statements and exhibits present directly contradictory accounts of the sequence of events, and thus whether the officers complied with the statute. We conclude that Flannery made an offer of proof Asufficiently definite, specific, detailed, and nonconjectural to enable the court to conclude that contested issues of fact going to the validity of the search are in question.” United States v. Ledesma, 499 F.2d 36, 39 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1024, 95 S.Ct. 501, 42 L.Ed.2d 298 (1974). Thus, an evidentiary hearing was required.")

Under 18 U.S.C. Section 3501(a), this Court is required to determine, outside the presence of the jury, whether any statements made by Mr. XXX XXX are voluntary. In addition, Section 3501(b) requires this Court to consider various enumerated factors, including whether Mr. XXX XXX understood the nature of the charges against him and whether he understood his rights. Fed. R. Crim. P. 12 requires that these factual determinations be supported by factual findings. See United States v. Prieto‑Villa, 910 F.2d 601, 606‑10 (9th Cir. 1990) (A"[S]uppression hearings are often as important as the trial itself." Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 46 . . . (1984) . . ."The government's case may turn upon the confession or other evidence that the defendant seeks to suppress, and the trial court's ruling on such evidence may determine the outcome of the case." . . ."[I]n many cases, the suppression hearing [is] the only trial, because the defendants thereafter plead[ ] guilty pursuant to a plea bargain." Waller, 467 U.S. at 47, 104 S. Ct. at 2216 (emphasis in original) . . . . The requirement that essential factual findings be placed on the record to facilitate appellate review originated at the Supreme Court and is underscored by the Court's statement in Murray that fact‑finding is the province of the district court.”) (internal citations and quotations omitted).

This Court must accordingly review the facts on the record in support and opposition of Mr. XXX XXX’s motion to suppress statements, and make factual findings in response to the defendant’s motion.