Legal Opinion
Hill v. United States
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided June 28, 1993No. 91-CF-131PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERRY, Associate Judge.
Appellant was convicted of distributing cocaine, in violation of D.C.Code § 33-541(a)(1) (1988). He contends on appeal that the trial judge erroneously applied the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule, thereby permitting illegally seized evidence — a $20 bill whose serial number had been pre-recorded — to be introduced at trial. Appellant also argues that the trial court’s supplementary charge to the jury deprived him of a fair trial and jury unanimity. Because we conclude on other grounds that the $20 bill was lawfully seized, we need not decide…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bailey v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Brown v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- Davis v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Bowman v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1994
- Speight v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- Prince v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- Beaner v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- United States v. TurnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.