Mark A. Moreno
How Judge Moreno rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Moreno
Mark A. Moreno has served as a United States magistrate judge in the District of South Dakota since 1993, principally in a part-time role based in Pierre. He earned his law degree from Creighton University and has also worked as a prosecutor and in private practice.
Judge Moreno's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Moreno's own (checked October 9, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 9, 2026).
- STANDING ORDER 25-03 - In the Matter of Procedures for the Access and Management of Non-Public Documents in Criminal Cases ↗
- Standing Order 22-06 Expert Witness Disclosure Deadlines in Criminal Cases ↗
- Standing Order 23-02 Revising the Procedure for Compassionate Release Motions Under the First Step Act ↗
- Standing Order 24-01 - Disclosure of Jail Incident Reports or Similar Documents ↗
How Judge Moreno decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Poor Bear, Moreno concluded that an agent could ask for identifying and contact information before giving Miranda warnings, even though the suspect volunteered incriminating details.
“Judge Moreno concluded that Agent Tucker 'could ask for identifying and contact information, including whether Poor Bear had a physical address without having to administer Miranda warnings.' ... 'if Poor Bear's gratuitous statements were inculpatory, they were his own doing and he has only himself to blame.'”
In Poor Bear, Moreno concluded that the agent’s request for a cheek swab after the suspect declined to waive his rights did not constitute interrogation under Miranda.
“Judge Moreno deemed this request not 'interrogatory within the meaning of Miranda.' ... This Court agrees with Judge Moreno that Agent Tucker's request that Poor Bear complete a cheek swab after he refused to waive his rights did not violate Miranda.”
For insurance bad-faith discovery, Moreno treated an adjuster's handling of comparable weather-related claims as relevant, while limiting production by time, claim type, and privacy redactions to keep it proportional.
“How he has handled weather-related property claims in the past is relevant, particularly in the bad faith context. ... the scope of the RFP is, however, limited to weather-related homeowners' claims since 2020.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING MOTION TO SUPPRESS”
“ORDERED that White Horse's Motion to Suppress, Doc. 105, is denied.”
“ORDERED that Poor Bear's Motion to Suppress and corresponding supplements, Doc. 34; Doc. 37; Doc. 44, are granted in part and denied in part as set forth in this Opinion and order.”
“ORDERED that the Kotelmans’ motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part.”
“ORDERED that the Kotelmans’ request for attorney’s fees is denied.”
“Judge Moreno denied Farm Bureau's motion to reconsider as the motion was not based on new evidence or a change in the law, the documents ordered by the previous decision on the motion to compel are relevant and not unduly burdensome to produce, and his earlier modifications to the original RFP 19 made the production order proportional.”
“ORDERED that NCIC’s partial objection to the Court’s order 6 is overruled because the Court’s initial order listed the email as privileged, and NCIC need not turn it over.”
“RECOMMENDED that Yankton County’s motion in limine82 be granted in part.”
“RECOMMENDED that Yankton County’s alternative motion to compel83 should be granted for RFPs 8, 9, 26, and 30, but denied for RFP 18”
“RECOMMENDED that NCIC’s motion for joinder84 be granted”
“RECOMMENDED that Yankton County’s motion to strike85 be granted for those portions of Reliance’s opposition that challenge the merits of the County’s in limine motion but denied for the portions that challenge the procedural aspects of NCIC’s motion.”
“RECOMMENDS that Defendant's pro se motion to dismiss the revocation petition or, in the alternative, to withdraw his admissions to paragraphs 2 and 5 of the petition. Docket No.169, be denied.”
“RECOMMENDED that White Mountain's motion to dismiss indictment36 be denied/ without prejudice.”
“RECOMMENDS that Defendant's Motion be denied in all respects.”
“RECOMMENDS that Lafferty's Motion to Dismiss Indictment, found at DocketNo.”
“RECOMMENDED that Yazzie's motion to suppress, including the supplement to it,57 be denied in its entirety for the reasons stated in this Report.”
Pending matters in the official report
Reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts under the Civil Justice Reform Act, as of March 31, 2026.
| Motions pending more than six months | 0 |
| Bench trials submitted more than six months | 0 |
| Bankruptcy appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Social Security appeals pending more than six months | 0 |
| Civil cases pending more than three years | 0 |
| Report | Motions over six months | Cases over three years |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 2026 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2025 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2024 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2023 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2022 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Mar 2021 | 0 | 0 |
| Sep 2020 | 0 | 0 |
A snapshot on that date: matters listed may since have been decided or reassigned. A motion referred to a magistrate judge is counted for both judges. Motions in multidistrict litigation, section 2255 cases and Social Security appeals are not counted, and a very large three-year count is generally a multidistrict docket. Source: Appendix A of the report (PDF); about the report.
How long civil cases take in this court
For the whole of United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, not for Judge Moreno: median time from filing to disposition of the civil cases the court closed in the 12 months ending September 30, 2025, as reported by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
| Cases | Median time | |
|---|---|---|
| All civil cases closed | 236 | 10.2 months |
| Closed with no court action | 76 | 11 months |
| Closed before pretrial | 151 | 8.7 months |
| Closed during or after pretrial | 1 | not reported |
| Closed during trial | 8 | not reported |
| 12 months ending | Cases closed | Median time |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2025 | 236 | 10.2 months |
| Sep 2024 | 248 | 11.5 months |
| Sep 2023 | 222 | 9.8 months |
| Sep 2022 | 220 | 12.1 months |
| Sep 2021 | 197 | 13.8 months |
| Sep 2020 | 216 | 11.1 months |
| Sep 2019 | 233 | 10.8 months |
The table leaves out prisoner petitions, land condemnations, deportation reviews, recovery of overpayments and enforcement of judgments, and reports no median for fewer than 10 cases. A district that closed a large multidistrict litigation in the period shows very large counts and long medians for that year. Source: Table C-5, U.S. District Courts (spreadsheet).
Draft for Judge Moreno with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Moreno, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Moreno's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace