United States v. Louis D. Smith, 524 F.2d 1287 (D.C. Cir. 1975). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Louis D. Smith, 524 F.2d 1287 (D.C. Cir. 1975). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1989 · …a stirring and sort of shuffling at p. 1287 ⚠ not in text
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1989 · …hurried movement' ... a stirring and sort of shuffling at p. 1287 ⚠ not in text
26 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Joseph Bonner, United States of America v. James Turner (cadc, 1989-08-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976 2001 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Joseph Bonner, United States of America v. James Turner (8×) also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
D.C. Cir. · 1989 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf. Smith II, 524 F.2d at 1287 (sounds of “a stirring and sort of shuffling” before entrance to search for drugs, Smith I, 520 F.2d at 75, created exigency); cf. also United States v. Jackson, 585 F.2d 653 (4th Cir.1978) (simultaneous announcement and entry justified by fear of destruction of gambling evidence).
examined Cited "see, e.g." West v. United States (4×)
D.C. · 1998 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., United States v. Smith, 171 U.S.App.D.C. 342, 343 , 520 F.2d 74, 75 , aff'd after remand, 173 U.S.App.D.C. 313 , 524 F.2d 1287 (1975) (per curiam) (entry justified by sounds of shuffling though to be "movement away from the door"); Masiello v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 57 , 58, 317 F.2d 121, 122 (1963) (entry justified when police "heard no words [of compliance] spoken" and heard "a rustling or other commotion inside the room").
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Louis D. SMITH, Appellant
75-1016.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Nov 14, 1975.
524 F.2d 1287
Bazelon, Fahy, McGOWAN, Per Curiam.
Cited by 13 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Following our remand of the record August 1, 1975, for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the court of that date, the District Court, on September 3, 1975, filed a Memorandum and Order pursuant to the remand. The Memorandum and Order include findings that the “record clearly establishes that the police entered forcibly after adequate announcement when exigent circumstances suggesting destruction or concealment were created by noises heard inside”, and that 18 U.S.C. § 3109 was complied with.

We think these findings should be sustained. Considered with the findings of the District Court made when the motion to suppress was denied by the District Court, the judgment of convictions is affirmed. Masiello v. United States, 115 U.S.App.D.C. 57, 317 F.2d 121 (1963).