United States v. Alfonso Acosta, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Alfonso Acosta, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
34 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 15 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Commonwealth v. Sheppard (mass, 1982-10-26)
Treatment trajectory · 1975 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1975 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Commonwealth v. Sheppard (2×)
Mass. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Acosta, 501 F.2d 1330, 1337 (5th Cir. 1974) (Gee, J., dissenting) (“Nor would I expand the [exclusionary] rule to ‘deter’ magistrates from failing to record matter upon which they rely, conceiving that they will obey the mandates of reviewing magistrates, such as we, when these are understood”), modified, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 891 (1975); State v. Lien, 265 N.W.2d 833 , 840-841 n.1 (Minn. 1978), quoting State v. Nolting, 312 Minn. 449 , 456-457 n.7 (1977) (exclusionary rule is directed at police, not magistrate, misconduct).
discussed Cited "see" Carl M. Hadra v. Herman Blum Consulting Engineers, a Texas Corporation (2×)
5th Cir. · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. Allied Chemical Corp., 501 F.2d 94, 103 (5th Cir. 1974), opinion adopted by court en banc, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1975).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Pio Garcia, United States of America v. Wilfredo Antonmarchi
3rd Cir. · 1976 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, United States v. Acosta, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir. 1975) (in banc); United States v. Rogers, 504 F.2d 1079, 1084-85 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1042 , 95 S.Ct. 2655 , 45 L.Ed.2d 693 (1975).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Willie Foster Sellers
4th Cir. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Acosta, 501 F.2d 1330 (5th Cir. 1974), reconsidered en banc 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir., filed March 7, 1975) (Judgment of the trial court admitting such evidence affirmed by an evenly divided court).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Armco, Inc. v. Southern Rock, Inc., Lester Engineering Company, Inc. And Horace B. Lester
5th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. Allied Chemical Corp., 501 F.2d 94 (1974), rehearing en banc, 509 F.2d 539 (5th Cir.1975) (adopting the panel opinion).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Callon Petroleum Company v. Big Chief Drilling Company, Defendant-Third-Party v. William R. Stanley, Defendant-Third-Party
3rd Cir. · 1977 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co. v. Allied Chemical Corp., 501 F.2d 94, 98-103 (5th Cir. 1974), aff’d en banc, 509 F.2d 539 (1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Alfonso Acosta
73--4016.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Apr 4, 1975.
509 F.2d 539
Published

509 F.2d 539

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Alfonso ACOSTA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 73--4016.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

March 7, 1975.
Rehearing Denied April 4, 1975.

Raymond C. Caballero, El Paso, Tex., for defendant-appellant.

William S. Sessions, U.S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., Edward Marquez, Ronald F. Ederer, Asst. U.S. Attys., El Paso, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before BROWN, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE, WISDOM, GEWIN, BELL, THORNBERRY, COLEMAN, GOLDBERG, AINSWORTH, GODBOLD, DYER, SIMPSON, MORGAN, CLARK, RONEY and GEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The Court adopts that part of the dissenting opinion of the panel dealing with 'The Sentencing Procedure' and vacates the sentence and remands the case for further sentencing, 501 F.2d 1330.

2

The Court, en banc, having considered the opinion and the judgment of the panel dealing with the admissibility of the evidence seized from Acosta's premises, is equally divided on this issue. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed by an evenly divided Court.