Legal Opinion

United States v. Stanert

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided August 28, 1985No. 84-5128PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

The opinion in this case, which was filed June 5, 1985, 762 F.2d 775, is amended by adding a footnote 1 at the end of the third full paragraph in Part III, at p. 780, beginning, “In his motion for an evidentiary hearing before the district judge____” Footnote 1 shall read:

The question whether a defendant has made a sufficient preliminary showing to entitle him to a Franks [v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S.Ct. 2674, 57 L.Ed.2d 667 (1978)] hearing is reviewable de novo. United States v. Ritter, 752 F.2d 435, 439 (9th Cir.1985).

As amended, the panel has unanimously voted to deny the petition…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Franks v. DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. United States v. Stanley Mills StanertCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  3. United States v. Alberto RitterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Crowe v. County of San DiegoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. Liston v. County of RiversideCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
  3. United States v. Michael J. McNeese and Laura ConwellCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
  4. United States v. Hector Martin RamosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
  5. Butler v. ElleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API