green
Positive treatment
6.3 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Coleman Tuton
The exclusionary rule's "sole purpose, we have repeatedly held, is to deter future Fourth Amendment violations." Davis v. United States , 564 U.S. 229 , 236-37, 131 S.Ct. 2419 , 180 L.Ed.2d 285 (2011). "[W]hen the police act with an objectively 'reasonable good-faith belief' that their conduct is lawful, or when their conduct involves only simple, 'isolated' negligence, the 'deterrence rationale loses much of its force,' and exclusion cannot 'pay its way.' " Id. at 238 , 131 S.Ct. 2419 (citations and quotations omitted); see United States v. Davis , 760 F.3d 901 , 904-05 (8th Cir. 2014) (exclu…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Kono
(2×)
See United States v. Whitaker , supra, 820 F.3d at 853 ; see also United States v. Davis , 760 F.3d 901 , 905 (8th Cir. 2014) (questioning continuing validity of earlier circuit precedent to contrary following Jardines ), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 996 , 190 L.Ed. 2d 872 (2015).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Aurelio PEREZ-ALEMAN
v.
UNITED STATES.
v.
UNITED STATES.
No. 14–7232..
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 12, 2015.
135 S. Ct. 995
Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.