United States v. Acosta
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
WESLEY, Circuit Judge:
Joseph Carvajal argues his conviction should be overturned, claiming the evidence presented against him at trial was obtained in violation of the knock-and-announce rule under the Fourth Amendment and 18 U.S.C. § 3109. Before oral argument, but after Carvajal filed his brief, the Supreme Court held in Hudson v. Michigan, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2159, 165 L.Ed.2d 56 (2006), that although a police officer’s failure to abide by the knock-and-announce rule may violate an individual’s right to be free from unreasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment, the exclusionary rule…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Wilson v. LayneSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Rodriguez De Quijas v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hudson v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Miller v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Roger Trent v. Steven WadeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
- Parker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Hourin v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 2017
- United States v. DanielczykDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2011
- Kyle-Labell v. Selective Serv. Sys.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2019
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.