Andrew Teter v. Anne E. Lopez

Oral argument

• Argued

  66 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “evidence seized in compliance with federal law is admissible without regard to state law”
• \[T]he federal government had no duty to obtain from state officials documents of which it was aware but over which it had no actual control.\
• “[T]he federal government had no duty to obtain from state officials documents of which it was aware but over which it had no actual control.”
• “evidence seized in compliance with federal law is admissible without regard to state law”
• information in possession of state authorities not available to federal prosecutor and need not be provided in discovery under Federal Rule 16(a); State v. Dowling, 453 A.2d 496, 499 (Me. 1982
• “[T]he federal government had no duty to obtain from state officials documents of which it was aware but over which it had no actual control.” (discussing United States v. Gatto, 763 F.2d 1040, 1047-49 (9th Cir. 1985))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).