green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.8 score
“to us, wilson's footnote suggests that evidence obtained by the police when the media is just present is not subject to the exclusionary rule, while it may remain an open question about whether evidence obtained by the media is subject to the exclusionary rule”
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Workcuff
to us, wilson's footnote suggests that evidence obtained by the police when the media is just present is not subject to the exclusionary rule, while it may remain an open question about whether evidence obtained by the media is subject to the exclusionary rule
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Billie Jerome Allen
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427, 430 (8th Cir.) (petit jury case), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 956 , 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 270 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Randy Anderson v. United States
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427, 429 (8th Cir.), cert. *753 denied, 534 U.S. 956 , 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 270 (2001). 3 .
cited
Cited "see"
Mateo Morales v. United States
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427 (8th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 270 (2001).
cited
Cited "see"
Mateo Morales v. United States
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427 (8th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 356 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Russell Dean Eide
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427, 430 (8th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 270 (2001) (evidence must be based not on theoretical yield but on what the particular defendant could produce); United States v. Cole, 125 F.3d 654, 655 (8th Cir.1997) (relevant inquiry is on what the defendant, not “an average cook,” is capable of yielding).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Russell D. Eide
See United States v. Anderson, 236 F.3d 427, 430 (8th Cir.) (per curiam), cert.denied, 122 S. Ct. 356 (2001) (evidence must be based not on theoretical yield but on what the particular defendant could produce); United States v. Cole, 125 F.3d 654, 655 (8th Cir. 1997) (relevant inquiry is on what the defendant, not "an average cook," is capable of yielding).
discussed
Cited "see"
Artis v. United States
Accord, United States v. Hendrixson, 234 F.3d 494, 496-97 (11th Cir.2000), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 269 (2001) (holding that evidence would not be subject to exclusion where unlawful media presence did not expand scope of police *968 search beyond that allowed by the terms of the warrant or otherwise facilitate the search). 7 Although Artis alleged that the police invited a television news crew to join them when they searched his home and backyard, he did not allege that the news crew helped the police to recover the weapons and ammunition that they found there.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jennifer Jones and Jamal Jones v. State of Indiana
See also State v. Peterson, 273 Ga. 657 , 543 S.E.2d 692, 696 (2001) (where the court noted that an officer’s entry in the house for the purpose of seeing that the children who had been left without responsible adult supervision were cared for properly was not a violation of the residents’ Fourth Amendment rights), cert. denied 534 U.S. 955 , 122 S.Ct. 356 , 151 L.Ed.2d 269 (2001). [20] Upon review, we find Crabb and Holder inapposite to the facts at hand.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brewer
v.
Texas
v.
Texas
No. 01-5145.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 9, 2001.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: W.D. Missouri (1)
Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Cer-tiorari denied.