United States v. James Bentley Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir. 1973). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. James Bentley Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir. 1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
59 citation events (7 in the last 25 years) across 33 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Thompson v. State (del, 2018-07-24)
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974 2000 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 30 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Thompson v. State
Del. · 2018 · confidence medium
In addition, in the 2010 Jenkins case, the Court noted in a footnote that “[t]his Court has not yet addressed whether the exclusionary rule should apply to violation of probation hearings [and] ‘[W]e do not reach the State’s argument that the exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation proceedings.’”21 In those cases, this Court did not consider the substantive question of whether the exclusionary rule applies to VOP proceedings. 19 Id. at 1150 . 20 Id. at 1155–56. 21 Id. at 1155 n.41 (quoting Fuller v. State, 844 A.2d 290, 293 (Del. 2004)). 14 In Pennsylvania Board of…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Thompson v. State
Del. · 2018 · confidence medium
In addition, in the 2010 Jenkins case, the Court noted in a footnote that “[t]his Court has not yet addressed whether the exclusionary rule should apply to violation of probation hearings [and] ‘[W]e do not reach the State’s argument that the exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation proceedings.’”21 In those cases, this Court did not consider the substantive question of whether the exclusionary rule applies to VOP proceedings. 19 Id. at 1150 . 20 Id. at 1155–56. 21 Id. at 1155 n.41 (quoting Fuller v. State, 844 A.2d 290, 293 (Del. 2004)). 14 In Pennsylvania Board of…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Walker
Del. Super. Ct. · 2018 · confidence medium
Id. at *3 (citing United States v. Armstrong, 187 F.3d 392, 393 (4th Cir. 1999); United States v. Finney, 897 F.2d 1047, 1048 (10th Cir.1990); United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 830-34 (3rd Cir. 1983); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir. 1978); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir. 1975) overruled by U.S. v. Hebert, 201 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir. 1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir. 1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Hayes
Tenn. Crim. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Winsett, 518 F.2d at 55 ; United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162 (6th Cir.1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973); Illinois v. Holliday, 318 Ill.App.3d 106 , 252 Ill.Dec. 719 , 743 N.E.2d 587, 593 (2001); Dulin v. State, 169 Ind.App. 211 , 346 N.E.2d 746, 751 (1976).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Armstrong
4th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
Sperling v. Fitzpatrick, 426 F.2d 1161, 1163-64 (2d Cir. 1970) (parole); United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 830-34 (3d Cir. 1983) (probation); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973) (per curiam) (probation); United States v. Farmer , 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir. 1975) (probation); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir. 1971) (probation); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir. 1978) (per curiam) (probation); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir. 1975) (probation); United States v. Finney, 897 F.2d 1047, 1048 (10th Cir. …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. David Mark Armstrong
4th Cir. · 1999 · confidence medium
Sperling v. Fitzpatrick, 426 F.2d 1161, 1163-64 (2d Cir.1970) (parole); United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 830-34 (3d Cir.1983) (probation); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam)(probation); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.1975) (probation); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir.1971) (probation); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir.1978) (per curiam) (probation); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975) (probation); United States v. Finney, 897 F.2d 1047, 1048 (10th Cir.1990) (pro…
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. James
E.D. Tex. · 1995 · confidence medium
See also United States v. Wiygul, 578 F.2d 577, 578 (5th Cir.1978) (per curiam) (same); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam) (same).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Turner
Kan. · 1995 · confidence medium
United States v. Finney, 897 F.2d 1047 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 830-34 (3d Cir. 1983), cert. denied 465 U.S. 1078 (1984); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir. 1978); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d at 53-55 ; United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied 423 U.S. 987 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir. 1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Alejandro Montez, Jr.
5th Cir. · 1992 · confidence medium
This Court has previously held “that the exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation hearings absent police harassment of probationers.” United States v. Wiygul, 578 F.2d 577, 578 (5th Cir.1978) (per curiam) (citing United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam) (alternate holding)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Linda Gail Finney
10th Cir. · 1990 · confidence medium
United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 830-34 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1078 , 104 S.Ct. 1439 , 79 L.Ed.2d 760 (1984); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir.1978); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed.2d 305 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir.1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Pratt v. United States Parole Commission
E.D.N.C. · 1989 · confidence medium
See Schneider v. Housewright, 668 F.2d 366 , 367-68 n. 4 (8th Cir.1981); United States v. Frederickson, 681 F.2d 711, 713-14 (8th Cir.1978); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir.1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kain v. State
Iowa · 1985 · confidence medium
See United States v. Bazzano, 712 F.2d 826, 834 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 104 S.Ct. 1439 , 79 L.Ed.2d 760 (1984); United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir.1978); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed.2d 305 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir.1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. John Bazzano (2×)
unknown court · 1983 · confidence medium
See United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir.1978) (per curiam); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed.2d 305 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir.1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Bazzano (2×)
unknown court · 1983 · confidence medium
See United States v. Frederickson, 581 F.2d 711, 713 (8th Cir.1978) (per curiam); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir.1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed.2d 305 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir.1973) (per curiam); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir.1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Lombardo (2×)
N.C. · 1982 · confidence medium
United States v. Wiygul, 578 F. 2d 577, 578 (5th Cir. 1978) (absent a demonstration of police harassment); United States v. Vandemark, 522 F. 2d 1019, 1020 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Winsett, 518 F. 2d 51 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F. 2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir. 1975); cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed. 2d 305 ; United States v. Brown, 488 F. 2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F. 2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir. 1971); United States ex rel Lombardino v. Heyd, 318 F. Supp. 648, 650-52 (E.D.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Perlie Donald Workman
4th Cir. · 1978 · confidence medium
See, e. g., Latta v. Fitzharris, 521 F.2d 246 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162 (6th Cir. 1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir. 1971); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Thomas Frederickson
8th Cir. · 1978 · confidence medium
See United States v. Vandemark, 522 F.2d 1019, 1020 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51, 53-55 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 987 , 96 S.Ct. 397 , 46 L.Ed.2d 305 (1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973) (alternate holding); United States v. Johnson, 455 F.2d 932, 933 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 856 , 93 S.Ct. 136 , 34 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir. 1971) (alternate holding); Connelly v. Parkinson, 405 F.Supp. 811, 814 (D.S.D.1975) (alter…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Manuszak
E.D. Pa. · 1977 · confidence medium
See, e. g., United States v. Vandemark, 522 F.2d 1019 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Winsett, 518 F.2d 51 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir. 1975); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States ex rel.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Iannece
E.D. Pa. · 1975 · confidence medium
Sperling v. Fitzpatrick, 426 F.2d 1161, 1163-64 (2d Cir. 1970); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Vandemark, 522 F.2d 1019 (9th Cir. 1975); United States v. Schipani, 435 F.2d 26 -28 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 983 , 91 S. Ct. 1198 , 28 L.Ed.2d 334 (1971); United States v. Cates, 402 F.2d 473, 474 (4th Cir. 1968).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Gerald Duane Vandemark (2×)
9th Cir. · 1975 · confidence medium
United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973) (alternate holding); United States v. Farmer, 512 F.2d 160, 162-63 (6th Cir. 1975); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 818-19 (7th Cir. 1971) (alternate holding); United States v. Allen, 349 F.Supp. 749, 753-54 (N.D.Cal.1972); United States ex rel.
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Ross Joseph Strada
8th Cir. · 1974 · confidence medium
See also United States v. Shapiro, 491 F.2d 335, 336 (6th Cir. 1974); United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973).
discussed Cited "see" United States v. Frazier
N.D. Ga. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir.1973) (exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation proceedings); see also United States v. Montez, 952 F.2d 854 (5th Cir.1992) (restating rule in context of supervised release revocation).
cited Cited "see" Ray v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
See, for example, United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir.1973) and United States ex rel.
cited Cited "see" Steve W. Bodeker v. Frank Dyson, Chief of Police of the City of Dallas
5th Cir. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir., 1973).
cited Cited "see" Dulin v. State
Ind. Ct. App. · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
See, United, States v. Brown, 488 F. 2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973).
cited Cited "see" United States v. William Gordon Winsett
9th Cir. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817, 819 (7th Cir. 1971); United States ex rel.
cited Cited "see" United States v. Rushlow
S.D. Cal. · 1974 · signal: see · confidence high
See, United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Reyna v. Feazell
N.D. Tex. · 2024 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See United States v. Montez, 952 F.2d 854, 857 (5th Cir. 1992); see also United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94, 95 (5th Cir. 1973).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Grubbs v. State
Fla. · 1979 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir.1973).
cited Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Jess Farmer
6th Cir. · 1975 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e. g., United States v. Brown, 488 F.2d 94 (5th Cir. 1973); United States v. Hill, 447 F.2d 817 (7th *163 Cir. 1971).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
James Bentley BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
73-2964.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 6, 1973.
488 F.2d 94
1973 U.S. App. LEXIS 6639
Stephen K. Johnson, Gainesville, Fla. (court-appointed), for defendant-appellant., William H. Stafford, Jr., U. S. Atty., Pensacola, Fla., Clinton Ashmore, Asst. U. S. Atty., Tallahassee, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.
Coleman, Gewin, Morgan, Per Curiam.
Cited by 56 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Appellant Brown has pursued this appeal from an order revoking his probation following an evidentiary hearing. Claiming to be a lay minister in a religious organization, The Children of God, the appellant went to a shopping center to preach. His enthusiastic efforts were not welcomed, complaints were made by patrons of the center, and he was arrested for trespassing after warning. A subsequent search uncovered a controlled substance in the appellant’s possession. Criminal charges were dropped, but this activity or the failure to report it to his probation officer or both facts served as the basis for his probation revocation.

Appellant contends that his arrest was not based upon probable cause and that the fruits of the unreasonable search should have been suppressed at his probation revocation hearing. Even assuming appellant is correct regarding the constitutionality of his arrest and search, he admits that the exclusionary rule does not apply to probation revocation hearings absent police harassment of probationers. [1] 2Upon a review of this record we find inadequate evidence of police misconduct or harassment to support an application of the exclusionary rule. Furthermore, we note that regardless of the legality of the arrest and search, appellant was charged with failure to report the incident to the Probation Officer. [2] Probation revocation is a matter entrusted to the sound discretion of the district court, and only upon a clear showing of abuse of that discretion will the district court’s decision be disturbed. [3]

Affirmed.

1

. See, United States ex rel. Sperling v. Fitzpatrick, 426 F.2d 1161 (2d Cir. 1970), and United States ex rel. Lombardino v. Heyd, 318 F.Supp. 648 (E.D.La.1970), aff’d, 438 F.2d 1027 (5th Cir. 1971) (per curiam).

2

. The district court’s findings of fact note that failure to report the indictment was charged, but are not clear as whether this constituted the basis for probation revocation.

3

. See, Burns v. United States, 287 U.S. 216, 221, 53 S.Ct. 154, 156, 77 L.Ed. 266, 269 (1932), and United States v. Garza, 484 F. 2d 88 (5th Cir. 1973).