Legal Opinion

United States v. Mark Steven Hitchcock

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided March 21, 2002No. 00-10251PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BETTY B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge.

We must decide whether military participation in a civilian criminal investigation violated the Posse Comitatus Act or 10 U.S.C. § 375. Because we conclude that the military’s participation falls under the “independent military purpose” exception, we affirm the district court’s order denying Hitchcock’s motion to dismiss the charges against him or to suppress all evidence because of a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and § 375. We must also decide whether evidence should be suppressed that was gathered under a search warrant obtained and executed on…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Massachusetts v. SheppardSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. United States v. Michael JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  5. United States v. Pantelis Antonakeas, AKA Alexx AntaeusCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. United States v. Michael DreyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
  2. United States v. Pirouz SedaghatyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  3. State v. GonsalvesHawaii Supreme Court · 2005
  4. United States v. HitchcockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  5. State v. McKnight.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2013

33 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