Legal Opinion

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena Chinske

District Court, D. Montana

Decided November 18, 1991No. MCR 91-43-M-CCLPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

LOVELL, District Judge.

This matter came on for hearing on Monday, November 18,1991, on Petitioner Cass Chinske’s motion to quash a grand jury subpoena. 1 Petitioner was represented by William Boggs and the United States was represented by Bernard Hubley. After reviewing the oral and written arguments of the parties, the court is now prepared to rule.

JURISDICTION

The court has limited supervisory power over grand jury proceedings, includ ing the power to quash a grand jury subpoena. However, the court must exercise its power to quash a grand jury subpoena with great caution…

2Cases cited13 opinions

Sherbert v. VernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Ore. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
United States v. DionisioSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
In Re Grand Jury Proceedings. In Re Jacqueline Schofield, WitnessCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973

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

3Cited by2 opinions

Roman Catholic Archbishop v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Issued May 3, 1994 for NashDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 1994