Michael D. Nelson

United States District Court for the District of Nebraska 3 signed orders read

How Judge Nelson decides

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

What persuades

On a Miranda suppression motion, Nelson applies the Eighth Circuit voluntary/knowing/intelligent waiver framework on the totality of the circumstances and will deny suppression where the interview was non-coercive (no restraints, accommodations granted, conversational tone, rights explained repeatedly) -- a defendant's illiteracy or limited time in the U.S. does not by itself defeat a valid waiver. An ambiguous reference to a lawyer ('What lawyer am I going to get?') is not an unequivocal invocation of counsel under Havlik.

“Judge Nelson correctly concluded that the defendant voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waived his Miranda rights. ... the defendant's statement of 'What lawyer am I going to get?' was not an unequivocal request for counsel.”

Nelson treats himself as bound by Eighth Circuit precedent even when the Supreme Court has granted certiorari on the same question: a pending cert grant (Gundy, on SORNA nondelegation) does not free the district court to depart from circuit law until the Supreme Court actually rules. A motion premised on an anticipated Supreme Court reversal is premature before him.

“Although the Supreme Court has granted certiorari on the same issue presented in this case, the Supreme Court has not issued its ruling. Therefore, this Court is bound to follow the standing precedent of the Eighth Circuit.”

Procedural preferences

Nelson's F&Rs carry the standard NECrimR 59.2 admonition: objections must be filed within 14 days, with a supporting brief filed at the same time, or the objection (and the right to review) is waived/abandoned. Where no objection is filed, the district judge reviews only for clear/plain error.

“IT IS ORDERED that if any party desires to object to the findings and recommendation, they shall do so no later than 14 calendar days following the date of the findings and recommendation or they may be deemed to have waived the right to object to adoption of the findings and recommendation.”

Motion outcomes

Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.

Motions to dismiss
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only
Motion to suppress
N = 1
Denied: 1 counts only

A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.

Signed rulings

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

United States v. Cornell Williams
8:18-cr-00302-RFR-MDN · 2018-11-14
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Denied

“IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED to United States District Court Judge Robert F. Rossiter, Jr., that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Indictment (Filing No. 17) be denied.”

United States v. Heleodoro Luviano-Cabrera
8:25-cr-00090-BCB-MDN · 2025-12-02
Motion to suppress (defendant) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Judge Nelson's Findings and Recommendation, Filing 55, is adopted in its entirety and defendant Heleodoro Luviano-Cabrera's Motion to Suppress, Filing 38, is denied.”

United States v. Kiara Jimenez
8:22-cr-00114-BCB-MDN · 2023-09-06

Nelson's OWN signed Findings & Recommendation on a guilty plea: after a Rule 11 colloquy (defendant orally consented to plead before a magistrate and was advised of the right to appear before a district judge), he finds the plea knowing/intelligent/voluntary with a factual basis and recommends District Judge Buescher accept it. Rules on no contested party motion; counts as an order read, not toward motion stats.

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 474 days (N = 5).

Median motion-to-ruling time: 110 days (N = 1).

Not systematically enumerated. Nelson-assigned dockets observed are consent-jurisdiction CIVIL cases (636(c)): Social-Security appeals (Nelson v. Saul), motor-vehicle/PI (Nelson v. Charter, Keim T.S. v. Best Trucking, Trew v. Hartter, Payne v. Walmart), and contract / product-liability (Landmark Snacks v. Gilman Cheese, Signal 88 v. RTC Security -- both pending). His criminal footprint is as the 636(b) referral magistrate issuing F&Rs on suppression/dismissal/plea matters in cases assigned to district judges (Buescher, Rossiter), captured in the reasoning layer.