Notes of Decisions
Cited in
749
cases (
19 in the last 5 years), 1968–2025 · leading case:
United States v. Corley, 500 F.3d 210 (3d Cir. 2007).
United States v. Corley, 500 F.3d 210 (3d Cir. 2007).
· cites it 50× “Johnnie Corley appeals his conviction and sentence for armed robbery and conspiracy to commit that crime. He presses three arguments: (1) his conviction must be vacated because his confessions should have been suppressed as evidence because they were made outside the six-hour…”
United States v. Alvarez-Sanchez, 511 U.S. 350 (1994).
· cites it 18× “This case concerns the scope of 18 U. S. C. § 3501 , the statute governing the admissibility of confessions in federal prosecutions.”
Everetts v. United States, 627 A.2d 981 (D.C. 1993).
· cites it 38× “Code §§ 22-2902, -3202), appellant contends that his confession made to the police following his arrest was the product of "unnecessary delay" under Rule 5(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure and 18 U.S.C. § 3501 , and should have been suppressed for that reason.”
Corley v. United States, 556 U.S. 303 (2009).
· cites it 4× “The question here is whether Congress intended 18 U. S. C. § 3501 to discard, or merely to narrow, the rule in McNabb v.”
United States v. Carmen Boche-Perez, 755 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 10× “In 1968, Congress modified the McNabb–Mallory framework by enacting 18 U.S.C. § 3501 . Section 3501(c) provides that a court may not suppress a confession made during a six-hour safe-harbor period solely due to a delay in presentment if the confession was made voluntarily.”
United States v. Pedro Alvarez-Sanchez, 975 F.2d 1396 (9th Cir. 1992).
· cites it 15× “The defendant had moved to suppress his confession on the ground that it was inadmissible under 18 U.S.C. § 3501 due to the delay between his arrest and arraignment.”
United States v. John David Bartlett, 856 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988).
· cites it 8× “The court then entered a ruling, carefully analyzing the record made at the October 2, 1984, hearing as it related to the finding of vol-untariness required by 18 U.S.C. § 3501 . The court found the following facts to have existed at the time the confession was given: (1)…”
United States v. Mitchell, 502 F.3d 931 (9th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Consequently, in Mitchell’s view, his confessions are inadmissible as they were involuntarily given under 18 U.S.C. § 3501 . ' As the government points out, Mitchell did not raise this specific issue at trial.”
United States v. Liera, 585 F.3d 1237 (9th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 8× “The District Court’s Failure To Suppress Liera’s Incriminating Statements Made During His Second Interrogation The primary issue here is whether the district court erred by not suppressing the incriminating statements Liera made to law enforcement officers during his second…”
People v. Cipriano, 429 N.W.2d 781 (Mich. 1988).
· cites it 6× “[2] For a general discussion of the McNabb-Mallory rule, see Keene, The ill-advised state court revival of the McNabb-Mallory rule, 72 J Crim L & Criminology 204 (1981); note, 18 USC § 3501 and the admissibility of confessions obtained during unnecessary prearraignment delay, 84…”
United States v. Yazzie, 998 F. Supp. 2d 1044 (D.N.M. 2014).
· cites it 28× “Court to continue the trial date to allow Yazzie further time to consider the plea and did not discuss with him the merits of suppressing the plea under 18 U.S.C. § 3501 (c), which excludes a confession that was made more than six hours after arrest but before arraignment, when…”
18 U.S.C. § 3501(a): 2 cases
18 U.S.C. § 3501(b): 2 cases
United States v. John David Bartlett, 856 F.2d 1071 (8th Cir. 1988).
“The court then entered a ruling, carefully analyzing the record made at the October 2, 1984, hearing as it related to the finding of vol-untariness required by 18 U.S.C. § 3501 . The court found the following facts to have existed at the time the confession was given: (1)…”
18 U.S.C. § 3501(b)(2): 1 case
18 U.S.C. § 3501(c): 2 cases
18 U.S.C. § 3501(d): 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.