Legal Opinion

United States v. Cohan

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided June 24, 2009No. 1:07-cr-00841PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FREDERIC BLOCK, Senior District Judge.

Defendant Barry Cohan (“Cohan”) has moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(h) to suppress the fruits of the search of his dental office on the ground that the warrant authorizing that search was insufficiently specific. On June 2, 2009, the Court denied the motion from the bench, stating that a written opinion would follow. The Court writes to explain the reasoning behind its decision, noting that although suppression is unwarranted in this case, (1) the underlying affidavit must be attached to the warrant and specifically…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  3. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. United States v. LeonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Jones v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. United States v. DupreeDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2011
  2. United States v. WeyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
  3. United States v. ZemlyanskyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2013
  4. United States v. CioffiDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2009
  5. People v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022

5 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