United States v. Mayton
United States Court of Military Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
Over defense objection, evidence was admitted on behalf of the Government which had been obtained by two game wardens of the Fish and Wildlife Section at Fort Hood, Texas, in a search of accused’s vehicle. As explained by trial counsel and implied in certain remarks by the trial judge, the basis for the admission was not probable cause, as to which trial counsel said he did not "have any comment to make,” but "consent to the search.”
While two game wardens, Tucker and Rodgers, were on patrol, they stopped the accused, who was driving a pickup truck, by blocking the road…
3Cases cited3 opinions
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. FrenchUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1959
- United States v. WestmoreUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1964
4Cited by10 opinions
- United States v. MiddletonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
- United States v. EzellUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- United States v. ChaseUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1976
- United States v. Mota ArosUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
- United States v. GillisUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1979
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.