United States v. Mark Steven Hitchcock
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
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
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Massachusetts v. SheppardSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Michael JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- 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
- United States v. Michael DreyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- United States v. Pirouz SedaghatyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- State v. GonsalvesHawaii Supreme Court · 2005
- United States v. HitchcockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- State v. McKnight.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2013
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.