United States v. Curry
U.S. Army Court of Military Review
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partO’Donnell, Senior Judge
I agree with the majority with respect to Parts I, II, III, IV, VII, VIII, IX, XI and XII. I disagree, however, with Parts V and VI (the two searches) and concur in the result only as to Part X (post-trial review).
I. The Two Searches
Initially, I disagree that the appellant lacked standing to contest the legality of the search of Sergeant Curry’s quarters. The Supreme Court in recent cases has limited the right of a person to attack the search of another’s residence. United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83, 100 S.Ct. 2547, 65 L.Ed.2d 619 (1980); Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.