green
Positive treatment
3.9 score
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Charles W. Ramsey
“Where Congress has both established a right and provided exclusive remedies for its violation, we would ‘encroach upon the prerogatives’ of Congress were we to authorize a remedy not provided for by statute.” Ware, 161 F.3d at 424 (quoting United States v. Frazin, 780 F.2d 1461, 1466 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 844 , 107 S.Ct. 158 , 93 L.Ed.2d 98 (1986)); see United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249, 1251-52 (11th Cir.1991) (court may not suppress testimony for statutory violation unless Congress explicitly or implicitly provided exclusion as a remedy for a violation), cert. de…
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Cain
See United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249 (11th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1075 , 112 S.Ct. 975 , 117 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Fregoso
See United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249, 1249-50 (11th Cir.1991) (information obtained from a pen register need not be suppressed despite noncompliance with statutory requirements because governing stat utes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3121-3127 , do not require exclusion for violations), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1075 , 112 S.Ct. 975 , 117 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Sonya Evette Singleton
See, e.g., United States v. Benevento, 836 F.2d 60, 69-70 (2d Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1043 , 108 S.Ct. 2035 , 100 L.Ed.2d 620 (1988); United States v. Michaelian, 803 F.2d 1042, 1049-50 (9th Cir.1986); United States v. Kington, 801 F.2d 733, 737-38 (5th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 481 U.S. 1014 , 107 S.Ct. 1888 , 95 L.Ed.2d 495 (1987); see also United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249, 1251-52 (11th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1075 , 112 S.Ct. 975 , 117 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Daccarett
United States v. Frazin, 780 F.2d 1461, 1466 (9th Cir.) (only remedy under RFPA is provided in statute), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 844 , 107 S.Ct. 158 , 93 L.Ed.2d 98 (1986); see also United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir.1991) (courts should not imply a suppression remedy unless statute specifically refers to exclusionary rule), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 975 , 117 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
United States v. Frazin, 780 F.2d 1461, 1466 (9th Cir.) (only remedy under RFPA is provided in statute), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 844 , 107 S.Ct. 158 , 93 L.Ed.2d 98 (1986); see also United States v. Thompson, 936 F.2d 1249, 1252 (11th Cir.1991) (courts should not imply a suppression remedy unless statute specifically refers to exclusionary rule), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 112 S.Ct. 975 , 117 L.Ed.2d 139 (1992). 64 In short on this point, because the RFPA does not protect the claimants, the Atlantico Claimants' counterclaim was properly dismissed, and the financial records were properly admit…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cascade Development Co., Inc.
v.
Madigan, Secretary of Agriculture
v.
Madigan, Secretary of Agriculture
No. 91-1033.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 27, 1992.
Cited by 9 opinions | Published
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.