Legal Opinion
United States v. Doe
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided May 18, 2006No. N04-2294, G.J.2005-2PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DOUMAR, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is a Motion by a City to Quash Subpoena Duces Te-cum under Rule 17(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The City’s motion is hereby GRANTED.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The City was served with a subpoena duces tecum from the United States that requested the production of documents containing statements made by police offi cers to what the Court will refer to as the Department’s internal affairs office — an investigatory arm within the Department. These statements were obtained as part of the Police Department’s internal investigation…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Jencks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Grand Jury, John Doe No. g.j.2005-2. United States of America v. Under SealCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
- City of Baton Rouge/Parish of East Baton Rouge v. Capital City Press, L.L.C.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 2009
- In re: Grand Jury v.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007