green
Positive treatment
Circuit Split
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.4 score
“a failure to comply with certain procedural requirements of f.r.cr.p. 41 has been held not to amount to deprivation of fourth amendment rights necessitating suppression”
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 34 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Joseph Michael Scully, United States of America v. Cirilo Mitchell Basas, United States of America v. Robert Mitchell MacEdo United States of America v. Steven James Sanchez, United States of America v. George Enos Cabral, United States of America v. Terrance Eugene MacEdo
But see United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1301-02 (8th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974) (remedy for violation of minimization requirement is civil suit, not suppression).
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Scully
But see United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1301-02 (8th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974) (remedy for violation of minimization requirement is civil suit, not suppression).
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Anthony Ricco, A/K/A \Tony Bragiole\""
a failure to comply with certain procedural requirements of f.r.cr.p. 41 has been held not to amount to deprivation of fourth amendment rights necessitating suppression
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Quinn
See United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489, 496 (3d Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Winters v. State
Petition of Becker, 515 F.Supp. 1193, 1196 (D.Kan.1981); accord United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293 (8th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); Watson v. Commonwealth, 433 S.W.2d 884 (Ky.1968).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Gerald F. Johnson, United States of America v. Thomas Johnson, United States of America v. Edward T. Wooten
NO. 1097, supra note 32, at 100, 1968 U.S.CODE CONG. & AD.NEWS at 2189; accord United States v. Vento, 533 F.2d 838, 855 (3d Cir.1976) 69 Cf. United States v. Kohne, 358 F.Supp. 1053, 1057 (W.D.Pa.) (failure to comply with Title III's annual reporting requirement not grounds for suppression), aff'd, 487 F.2d 1395 (3d Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2624 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. George Raymond Wright
See United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1306 (8th Cir. 1972) cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1971) (upholding a search conducted by two Federal Bureau of Narcotics agents assisted by two city policemen).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Kenneth Clark and Eric Romandi
See United States v. Kohne, 358 F.Supp. 1053 (W.D.Pa.1973), affirmed 48. 5 F.2d 679 , 682, 487 F.2d 1394 , 1395, cert. denied 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2624 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974) (where there was strong evidence of conspiracy, fact that defendants convicted of substantive gambling charge were acquitted of conspiracy did not retroactively render inadmissible hearsay declarations of *404 co-conspirators).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Winters
See U. S. v. Kohne, 487 F.2d 1395 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. den. 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2624 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Esposito
See United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489, 502 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974). .
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Vento
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
examined
Cited "see"
United States v. Vento
(4×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
Alliance to End Repression v. Rochford
See, U. S. Board of Parole v. Merhige, 487 F.2d 25 (4th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2625 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 ; U. S. v. North Side Realty Associates, 324 F.Supp. 287 (D.C.Ga.,1971).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. London
See United States v. Fino, 478 F.2d 35, 37 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Frank Ricardo Scott, A/K/A \Reds
See United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1301-02 (8th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974): Furthermore, even if the surveillance in this case did reflect a failure to minimize, it would not follow that Congress intended that as a consequence all the evidence obtained should be suppressed.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Chiarizio
See United States v. Fino, 478 F.2d 35 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); United States v. James, 161 U.S.App.D.C. 88 , 494 F.2d 1007 (1974); United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293 (8th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re: Gina McCarthy v.
See, e.g., U.S. Bd. of Parole v. Merhige, 487 F.2d 25 , 29 (4th Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2625 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974); In re United States (Jackson), 624 F.3d 1368, 1372-73 (11th Cir.2010); In re Cheney, 544 F.3d 311, 314 (D.C.Cir.2008).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Cleveland
See, e.g., United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1301 (8th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974) (“Clearly Congress did not intend that evidence directly within the ambit of a lawful order should be suppressed because the officers, while awaiting incriminating evidence, also gathered extraneous conversations.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Paul S. Barnes
See 18 U.S.C. § 2520 ; United States v. Cardall, 773 F.2d 1128, 1134 (10th Cir.1985); see also United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1302 (8th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974) (remedy for failure to minimize wiretapping was a civil suit under § 2520).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Mazzone
See also United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293 (8th Cir.1972) (advocating partial suppression and suggesting a civil suit against the investigating officers as a remedy for unauthorized interception), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Quinn
(2×)
See, e.g., United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489, 496 (3rd Cir.1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); United States v. Cohen, 530 F.2d 43, 46 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 429 U.S. 855 , 97 S.Ct. 149 , 50 L.Ed.2d 130 (1976); United States v. Carubia, 377 F.Supp. 1099, 1107 (E.D.N.Y.1974). [10] *764 The conclusion we draw from the federal cases is that federal courts would read the statutory termination phrase "* * * necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization * * *" into the order and then examine the actions of the police officers to see if, in fact,…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Daniel v. State
See, e.g., United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1304 (8th Cir.1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974). (“Adequate judicial supervision or protective procedures such as are required by this Act provide the reasonableness which the Fourth Amendment requires.”) We adopt the reasoning of the federal courts and hold that art. 18.20 does not violate art.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
People v. Calogero
By its very nature, electronic surveillance of telephone calls cannot be made without overhearing some nonpertinent conversations (United States v Bynum, 485 F2d 490, 500, vacated on other grounds 417 US 903 ; see, also, United States v Cox, 462 F2d 1293, 1301, cert den 417 US 918 ).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Abrahams
See also United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489, 499 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); Martin v. United States, 341 F.2d 576 (5th Cir. 1965).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Adele Halkin
See, e. g., U. S. Bd. of Parole v. Merhige, 487 F.2d 25 (4th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2625 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 . . 167 U.S.App.D.C. at 24 , 510 F.2d at 1245 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Scott v. United States
(2×)
See, e. g., United States v. Cox, 462 F. 2d 1293, 1301-1302 (CA8 1972), cert. denied, 417 U. S. 918 (1974); United States v. Sisca, 361 F. Supp. 735, 746-747 (SDNY 1973), aff’d, 503 F. 2d 1337 (CA2), cert. denied, 419 U. S. 1008 (1974); United States v. Mainello, 345 F. Supp. 863, 874-877 (EDNY 1972); United States v. LaGorga, 336 F. Supp. 190 (WD Pa. 1971).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. James M. McCoy
See, e. g., United States v. Cafero, 5 Cir. 1973, 473 F.2d 489, 496 , cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Antonio Flores
See, e.g., United States v. Fino, 478 F.2d 35, 38 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); United States v. Smith, 464 F.2d 1129, 1133 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1023 , 93 S.Ct. 462 , 34 L.Ed.2d 314 (1972); United States v. Binder, 453 F.2d 805, 808 (2d Cir.1971), cert. denied, 407 U.S. 920 , 792 S.Ct. 2458 , 32 L.Ed.2d 805 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Virginia Electric and Power Company, Virginia Electric and Power Company v. Sun Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company v. Stone and Webster Engineering Company
See also, United States Board of Parole v. Merhige, 487 F.2d 25 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2625 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974); United States v. Hemphill, 369 F.2d 539 (4th Cir. 1966). 59 We believe that the issue raised in VEPCO's petition presents a proper case for issuance of the writ.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co.
See also, United States Board of Parole v. Merhige, 487 F.2d 25 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2625 , 41 L.Ed.2d 224 (1974); United States v. Hemphill, 369 F.2d 539 (4th Cir. 1966).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Anthony v. Daly
See, e. g., United States v. Cox, 462 F.2d 1293, 1301 (8th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974); United States v. Quintana, 508 F.2d 867, 875 (7th Cir. 1975); United States v. Bynum, 485 F.2d 490, 500-502 (2d Cir. 1973), vacated on other grounds, 417 U.S. 903 , 94 S.Ct. 2598 , 41 L.Ed.2d 209 (1974), appeal after remand, 513 F.2d 533 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 952 , 96 S.Ct. 357 , 46 L.Ed.2d 277 (1975). 8 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Murrell Bedford
(2×)
See also United States v. Cafero, 473 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2622 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974). "(I)f a prompt search would have disclosed nothing incriminating, and if during an unreasonable delay period the defendant brings incriminating evidence into or onto the premises which is seized as a result of the delayed search, the defendant has sustained legal prejudice." United States v. McClard, 333 F.Supp. 158, 166 (E.D.Ark.1971), aff'd, 462 F.2d 488 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 988 , 93 S.Ct. 345 , 34 L.Ed.2d 255 (1972).
examined
Cited "see, e.g."
Commonwealth v. Vitello
(4×)
See, e.g., United States v. Fino, 478 F. 2d 35, 37 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. den. 417 U. S. 918 (1974) (giving of general instructions for minimization, including hours of day when telephones could be tapped, was sufficient compliance with the statute).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Rogelio Quintana
United States v. Manfredi, 488 F.2d 588 , 599— 600 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 936 , 94 S.Ct. 2651 , 41 L.Ed.2d 240 (1974); see also United States v. Fino, 478 F.2d 35, 37 (2d Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 918 , 94 S.Ct. 2623 , 41 L.Ed.2d 223 (1974).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cox
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 72-5278.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 28, 1974.
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Mr. Justice Douglas would grant certiorari.