Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Victor Arditti, United States of America v. Guillermo Avila

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided June 2, 1992No. 90-8646, 90-8721Published

1Concurrence

GOLDBERG, Circuit Judge,

specially concurring:

When one door closes, fortune will usually open another.6

The Rule 16 door closes, so a criminal defendant attempts to pry open the Rule 17(c) portal. The district court, as keeper of the Rule 17(c) gate, hears the chanting of the “open sesame!” incantation7 — “let me obtain the evidence” — but cannot unlock the entry, for the recitation fails to satisfy the demanding requirements of Rule 17(c). I concur in the majority opinion and write merely to elucidate the distinction that I see between Rules 16 and 17(c) and to explain the district court’s…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Bowman Dairy Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. In Re Martin Marietta Corporation, United States of America v. William C. PollardCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
  4. United States v. The Larouche Campaign, Appeal of National Broadcasting Company, IncCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
  5. United States v. Carlos MarcelloCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970

7 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