Legal Opinion
United States v. Crushiata
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided June 13, 1932No. 434PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChase, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
It is claimed that the entry of the barn under the circumstances above outlined was unlawful and that the evidence so acquired was erroneously admitted against these appellants because obtained through an unlawful search and seizure. Without meaning to indicate an agreement with this contention, it is enough for present purposes to point out that, if the entry was in violation of the rights of any one, these defendants are not the ones who may raise that issue. They were merely workmen without any interest in the premises invaded or the property seized.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Schroeder v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Rouda v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- United States v. MessinaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- De Gregorio v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- In Re DooleyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kelley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1932
- Kitt v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1942
- United States v. ConoscenteCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- United States v. Herman Ulysses Gumbs, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1957
- United States v. MuscarelleCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.