Legal Opinion
United States v. Michael Lennick
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided October 26, 1990No. 90-1063PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COFFEY, Circuit Judge.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant Michael Lennick argues that the district court erred in admitting at trial a statement- Lennick made to a federal agent. Lennick was charged and convicted of making a false statement to a federal agent in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 after he told the agent that he was the owner of a certain gun. Lennick contends that the statement was admitted in violation of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). He also claims that the trial judge erred in calculating his sentence under the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- United States v. Samuel ScrogginsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Alvaro HerreraCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Abraham Ceballos and Efrain AdamesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- United States v. Michael S. MenzerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- United States v. John R. MountCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Jeffrey C. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- United States of America, Cross-Appellant v. Patrick J. Doherty, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Louis D. RandleCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.