Legal Opinion

United States v. Michael Carey

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 7, 2016No. 14-50222PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GOULD, Circuit Judge:

Dissent by Judge Kozinski Acting pursuant to the Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-22, federal agents secured a wiretap order for a San Diego phone number based on evidence that Ignacio Escamilla Estrada (Escamilla) was using the number in a drug smuggling and distribution conspiracy. Agents monitoring the wiretap overheard drug-related phone conversations. At some point during a seven-day period, the agents realized that Escamilla was not using the phone. Agents continued listening, however, believing at least initially that the people speaking on the phone might…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Maryland v. GarrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Liston v. County of RiversideCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1997
  4. United States v. Louis John Ippolito, Michael Contino, Irving Schwartz, William Darnold, Lawrence Miller, Thomas Arrants, and Arthur Joseph NatoliCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  5. United States v. ReedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. CareyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API